Mohmedmunaf Noormohmed Cambaywala Vs ITO (Gujarat High Court)
Summary: The Gujarat High Court considered a writ petition arising from reassessment proceedings initiated by the Income Tax Department in respect of the petitioner. The proceedings involved notices issued under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 under the regime operative prior to 01.04.2021, followed by notices under Section 148A(b) under the amended regime that came into force from 01.04.2021. A subsequent order under Sections 147, 250 and 144B was passed on 21.03.2026. The writ petition was considered by the Division Bench comprising Justice A.S. Supehia and Justice Pranav Trivedi, and judgment was pronounced on 29.04.2026.
The petitioner demonstrated before the Court that the issue concerning notices issued under Section 148 prior to 01.04.2021 and notices under Section 148A(b) introduced by the Finance Act, 2021 with effect from 01.04.2021 had been considered by the Supreme Court in Union of India and others Vs. Rajeev Bansal, reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2693.
The judgment records that, for Assessment Year 2015-16, the Revenue had conceded before the Supreme Court that notices issued on or after 01.04.2021 would have to be dropped because they would not fall within the period prescribed under the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 (TOLA). The Revenue’s submission before the Supreme Court was that, under the amended regime involving Section 148A(b), notices could have been issued only up to 31.03.2022, and that the notices issued in the matter were consequently time-barred. The High Court recorded that the subsequent proceedings, including the order passed under Section 147 read with Sections 250 and 144B dated 21.03.2026, were consequently bad in law.
