Synokem Pharmaceuticals Ltd Vs ACIT (Delhi High Court)
The Delhi High Court considered an application filed by the petitioner in the context of proceedings concerning reassessment under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner’s counsel submitted that a batch of appeals filed by both assessees and the Union of India (UOI) had been heard by the Supreme Court and, by order dated 10.04.2026, the matters were remanded to the High Courts to consider the effect of the amendment to Section 147A introduced by Act No. 4 of 2026.
The respondent opposed the application. Learned Senior Standing Counsel submitted that the application was liable to be rejected because the Delhi High Court had already held in T.K.S. Builder Pvt. Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer, New Delhi (2024) DHC 8330 DB that, following insertion of Section 151A of the Income Tax Act, the Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO) and Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) possessed concurrent jurisdiction and that a notice under Section 148 could be issued by either officer.
The respondent further pointed out that the writ petitions filed by the assessees had been decided against them by the Delhi High Court and that appeals against those judgments were pending before the Supreme Court. According to the respondent, paragraphs 22 and 23 of the Supreme Court’s order dated 10.04.2026 showed that only those orders in appeals filed by the department where the High Court had ruled in favour of the assessee had been set aside, while the assessees were given liberty to examine the retrospectivity of the amendment to Section 147A.
