Samir Andrea Kasliwal Vs PCIT (Rajasthan High Court)
Rajasthan High Court addressed multiple petitions challenging reassessment orders and demand notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner argued that the reassessment for multiple assessment years (2012-13 to 2019-20) was barred by limitation under the new legal regime introduced by the Finance Act, 2021. The petitioner cited the Supreme Court’s ruling in Union of India & Ors. Vs. Rajeev Bansal (2024), which clarified that reassessments could not be extended under the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 (TOLA). Additionally, the petitioner contended that the reassessment was conducted in a non-faceless manner, contrary to legal provisions, and that some notices were issued in the name of a deceased person, rendering them invalid.
The respondents defended the reassessment, arguing that it was based on material recovered during a search operation on another entity, which revealed transactions linked to the deceased father of the petitioner. They further claimed that the petitioner had previously challenged the reassessment notices in court and had accepted the supply of reasons for reopening. Following this, the assessment orders were passed with due process. Citing Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Chhabil Dass Agarwal (2013), the respondents asserted that the petitioner should exhaust alternative statutory remedies before approaching the High Court.
