Facts of the Case

The present batch of writ petitions concerns reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for Assessment Years (AY) 2016–17 and 2017–18.

The petitioners (assessees) challenged reassessment notices issued by the Revenue authorities after the amendment introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, which substituted Sections 147 to 151 and introduced Section 148A.

Key factual background:

  • Notices under old Section 148 were issued between 01.04.2021 and 30.06.2021.
  • These notices were later treated as issued under Section 148A(b) pursuant to the Supreme Court judgment in Union of India vs Ashish Agarwal.
  • The escaped income in all cases was below ₹50 lakhs.
  • The Revenue relied on:
    • TOLA (Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020)
    • CBDT Instruction dated 11.05.2022
    • Supreme Court ruling in Ashish Agarwal

The core dispute revolved around whether reassessment notices were barred by limitation under Section 149(1).

Issues Involved

  1. Whether reassessment notices issued under Section 148 after 01.04.2021 are governed by:
    • Old regime or
    • Amended provisions introduced by Finance Act, 2021.
  2. Whether Revenue can invoke extended limitation under Section 149(1)(b) (up to 10 years) when:
    • Escaped income is below ₹50 lakhs.
  3. Whether the “travel back in time” theory (treating notices as issued earlier) is legally sustainable.
  4. Whether CBDT Instruction dated 11.05.2022 is valid in law.

Relevant Sections Involved

  • Section 147 – Income escaping assessment
  • Section 148 – Issue of notice
  • Section 148A – Procedure before issuance of notice
  • Section 149(1)(a) – Limitation of 3 years
  • Section 149(1)(b) – Extended limitation up to 10 years (₹50 lakh threshold)
  • Section 151 / 151A – Sanction & procedure
  • Section 119 – CBDT powers
  • TOLA, 2020
  • Finance Act, 2021

Petitioner’s Arguments

  • Limitation expired:
    • AY 2016–17 → 31.03.2020
    • AY 2017–18 → 31.03.2021
  • Since escaped income was below ₹50 lakhs, only Section 149(1)(a) (3 years) applies.
  • Revenue cannot invoke extended limitation under Section 149(1)(b).
  • The “travel back in time” theory:
    • Has no statutory backing
    • Not supported by Supreme Court judgment
    • Not supported by TOLA
  • After Finance Act, 2021, only the new regime applies for notices issued post 01.04.2021.
  • CBDT Instruction dated 11.05.2022:
    • Is ultra vires
    • Cannot override statutory provisions
  • Substitution of law:
    • Old provisions ceased to exist
    • New provisions must be strictly applied

Respondent’s Arguments (Revenue)

  • Supreme Court in Ashish Agarwal validated notices issued between 01.04.2021–30.06.2021.
  • Such notices should be treated as Section 148A(b) notices.
  • Through TOLA and Notifications, limitation stood extended up to 30.06.2021.
  • Time exclusions apply under provisos to Section 149.
  • Therefore, notices are within limitation.
  • CBDT Instruction is:
    • Valid
    • In line with Supreme Court directions

Court Findings / Analysis

1. Applicability of New Regime

  • After 01.04.2021, reassessment must comply with amended provisions.
  • Old provisions cannot be applied post substitution.

2. Limitation under Section 149

  • Where escaped income is below ₹50 lakhs:
    • Only 3-year limitation under Section 149(1)(a) applies.
  • Revenue cannot invoke extended 10-year limitation.

3. Rejection of “Travel Back in Time” Theory

  • The theory is:
    • Not supported by statute
    • Not supported by Supreme Court judgment
    • Legally unsustainable

4. Effect of Ashish Agarwal Judgment

  • Supreme Court only:
    • Converted notices to Section 148A(b)
  • It did not extend limitation or revive time-barred notices.

5. CBDT Instruction Invalid to Extent

  • Cannot override:
    • Parent statute
    • Judicial interpretation

Court Order / Decision

  • Reassessment notices issued under Section 148 quashed where:
    • Limitation exceeded 3 years
    • Escaped income was below ₹50 lakhs
  • Revenue cannot rely on extended limitation in such cases.

Important Clarifications by Court

  • Finance Act, 2021 applies retrospectively to pending matters where notices issued after 01.04.2021.
  • Strict interpretation of limitation provisions in tax law must be followed.
  • Executive instructions cannot override statute or judicial rulings.
  • No legal fiction exists allowing retrospective validation of time-barred notices.

Link to download the order -https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/showFileJudgment/RAS10112023CW115272022_212005.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.