Facts of the Case
The batch of writ petitions before the Delhi High
Court concerned reassessment proceedings initiated by the Income Tax Department
for Assessment Years 2016-17 and
2017-18.
The petitioners had filed their income tax returns
which were processed by the department under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Subsequently,
following the judgment of the Supreme Court in Union of India v. Ashish
Agarwal, the Income Tax Department issued notices under Section 148A(b) alleging that income
had escaped assessment.
After receiving replies from the petitioners, the
department passed orders under Section
148A(d) and issued consequential reassessment notices under Section 148.
The petitioners challenged these reassessment
notices before the Delhi High Court on the ground that the notices and orders
were issued without approval from the
“specified authority” as mandated under the Income Tax Act.
Issues Involved
- Whether reassessment notices issued under Sections 148 and 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are
valid when the approval of the specified
authority under Section 151(ii) is not obtained.
- Whether reliance by the Revenue on Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain
Provisions) Act, 2020 (TOLA) and CBDT Instruction No.1/2022 can
override statutory requirements of approval under the Income Tax Act.
- Whether reassessment proceedings initiated without proper statutory
approval are sustainable in law.
Petitioner’s Arguments
- The reassessment proceedings were initiated without obtaining the mandatory approval of the “specified
authority” under Section 151(ii) of the Income Tax Act.
- The approval relied upon by the Revenue was granted by an authority
not competent under the statutory
scheme.
- The requirement of approval by the specified authority is a jurisdictional condition, and
absence of such approval renders the reassessment proceedings invalid.
- Reliance by the Revenue on TOLA
and CBDT Instruction No.1/2022 dated 11.05.2022 cannot override the
provisions of the Income Tax Act.
- The reassessment proceedings were therefore liable to be quashed.
Respondent’s Arguments
- The reassessment proceedings were validly initiated after obtaining
approval from the concerned authority.
- The department relied upon the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain
Provisions) Act, 2020 (TOLA) and CBDT Instruction No.1 of 2022.
- According to the Revenue, the requirement of approval by a
particular authority was not
mandatory in the circumstances of the case.
Court Findings
- The statute clearly mandates that prior approval of the specified authority is required before issuing
a notice under Section 148.
- The argument that approval of the specified authority is not
mandatory is contrary to the
provisions of the Income Tax Act.
- Statutory requirements cannot be diluted by administrative
instructions or reliance on TOLA.
Court Order
The Delhi High Court ruled in favour of the assessees and against the Revenue.
The Court held that reassessment proceedings initiated without obtaining approval of the
specified authority under Section 151 of the Income Tax Act are not sustainable
in law.
Important Clarification by the Court
- The approval of the specified authority under Section 151 is a
mandatory statutory requirement.
- Administrative instructions or relaxation laws cannot override
statutory provisions of the Income Tax Act.
- Reassessment proceedings must strictly comply with the procedural safeguards provided in Sections 148, 148A and 151.
Link to download the order - https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/showFileJudgment/RAS05012024CW165242022_114311.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.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment