SINGHAL HOUSING AND INFRAVENTURES PVT. LTD. vs. INCOME TAX WARD AND 3 OTHERS

WTAX/490/2023HC AllahabadUPHC01087977202306 August 20252 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the orders passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in all such matters, including the petitioner's, and any consequential proceedings, are required to be quashed and set aside. This decision is based on the Supreme Court's pronouncements in Union of India vs. Rajeev Bansal and Union of India vs. Ashish Agarwal, which have decided the issue regarding the validity of notices issued under Section 148 from April 1, 2021, till June 30, 2021. The court directed the Assessing Officer to allow the petitioner to file objections again and dispose of them in accordance with the law laid down by the Supreme Court. The petitioner is at liberty to raise new objections, including jurisdictional ones, and rely on other applicable Supreme Court judgments. These objections are to be filed within four weeks, after which the authority must grant a hearing and pass orders. The assessee is also free to pursue other rights and remedies, except for issues concluded by the Supreme Court judgments. The court also noted that observations made in paragraphs 112, 113, and 114 of Rajeev Bansal (supra) regarding orders passed under Section 148A(d) beyond time shall apply.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Singhal Housing And Infraventures Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition challenging an order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which rejected its objections to the initiation of reassessment proceedings under Section 148. The petitioner is aggrieved by the rejection of its objections. The respondent is the Income Tax Department. The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated. The procedural history involves the petitioner filing objections to reassessment proceedings, which were then rejected by the Assessing Officer. The matter is before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, rejecting the petitioner's objections to reassessment proceedings, is valid, considering the Supreme Court's decisions in Union of India vs. Rajeev Bansal and Union of India vs. Ashish Agarwal concerning notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, from April 1, 2021, to June 30, 2021. Contentions: Assessee (Petitioner): The petitioner primarily relies on the Supreme Court judgments in Rajeev Bansal and Ashish Agarwal, implying that the reassessment proceedings initiated against it may be vitiated by these pronouncements. The petitioner seeks to raise new objections, including jurisdictional ones, and rely on other Apex Court judgments. Revenue (Respondent): The revenue is represented by counsel, but their specific contentions are not recorded in the judgment. However, the court's directions suggest that the revenue's initial order under Section 148A(d) is being set aside.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:133881-DB

Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 490 of 2023 Petitioner :- Singhal Housing And Infraventures Pvt. Ltd. Respondent :- Income Tax Ward And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rahul Agarwal Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,Gaurav Mahajan,Sudarshan Singh Hon'ble Shekhar B. Saraf,J. Hon'ble Praveen Kumar Giri,J.

1.

Heard Sri Rahul Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri Navin Chandra Gupta, Sri Gopal Verma & Sri Sudarshan Singh, learned counsel for the respondent-Union of India and learned validity of notices issued under Section 148 of the In

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 148A

All 3,543 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →