Facts of the Case

The writ petitions filed by Jagmohan Kejriwal formed part of a large batch of matters adjudicated together by the Delhi High Court in ITA 52/2024 and connected cases. The petitions arose from reassessment proceedings initiated by the Income Tax Department through issuance of notices by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 62(1), Delhi. The petitioner challenged the legality of these proceedings on the ground that they were initiated without adherence to the statutory framework governing reassessment under the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether reassessment proceedings were validly initiated in accordance with statutory requirements under the Income-tax Act.
  2. Whether the impugned notices complied with jurisdictional conditions and limitation provisions.
  3. Whether proceedings initiated without proper statutory foundation could be sustained in law.
  4. Whether relief should be granted where the Revenue acted beyond its lawful authority.

Petitioner’s Arguments

  • The impugned notices were issued without satisfying mandatory statutory prerequisites for initiating reassessment proceedings.
  • The proceedings were without jurisdiction and contrary to the safeguards provided under the Act.
  • Statutory limitations and procedural requirements had not been complied with.
  • Consequently, the notices and subsequent actions were liable to be quashed.

Respondent’s Arguments

  • The reassessment proceedings were initiated on the basis of material indicating escaped income.
  • The statutory framework permits reopening of assessments subject to prescribed conditions.
  • The impugned notices were issued in accordance with law and within jurisdiction.
  • Therefore, the proceedings were valid and sustainable.

Court Order / FINDINGS

  • Reassessment proceedings must strictly conform to the statutory framework prescribed under the Income-tax Act.
  • Jurisdictional requirements and procedural safeguards are mandatory in nature.
  • Proceedings initiated without compliance with these requirements are without jurisdiction and unsustainable in law.
  • Courts are empowered to intervene where statutory safeguards are disregarded.

Important Clarification

  • Reassessment provisions, though enabling recovery of escaped income, remain subject to strict statutory limitations.
  • Jurisdictional defects cannot be cured by subsequent proceedings.
  • Authorities must demonstrate compliance with all statutory prerequisites before invoking reassessment powers.
  • Taxpayers are entitled to protection against actions taken beyond lawful authority.

Link to download the order –  https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1772279334_JAGMOHANKEJRIWALVsINCOMETAXOFFICERWARD621DELHIANR..pdf  

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.