SURESH KUMAR BAGARIA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NO. 3(1), ASANSOL AND ORS
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court, in view of the judgments of this court dated January 17, 2022, in the cases of Manoj Jain-vs-Union of India & Ors. (WPA No.11950 of 2021) and Bagaria Properties and Investment Private Limited & Anr. (WPO No.244 of 2021), disposed of all the writ petitions by allowing them. The Court declared Explanations A(a)(ii)/A(b) to the notifications dated March 31, 2021, and April 27, 2021, to be ultra vires the Relaxation Act, 2020, and consequently, bad in law and null and void. All the impugned notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, were quashed. The assessing officers were granted liberty to initiate fresh re-assessment proceedings in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Act as amended by the Finance Act, 2021, and after complying with the required legal formalities. The ratio decidendi is that the extension of pre-amendment provisions of Section 148, 149, and 151 beyond March 31, 2021, through subordinate legislation, without legislative backing from the parent Act (Relaxation Act, 2020), is invalid.
What were the facts?
The petitioners, assessees under the Income Tax Act, 1961, are challenging notices issued under Section 148 of the Act. They contend that these notices are barred by limitation and that the revenue authorities failed to comply with the mandatory procedural requirements of Section 148A of the Act, as amended by the Finance Act, 2021, which became applicable from April 1, 2021. The assessment years are not specified. The petitioners are seeking to quash these re-assessment notices issued after March 31, 2021, and also seek a declaration that certain Explanations to Notifications dated March 31, 2021, and April 27, 2021, are ultra vires the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the impugned notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are barred by limitation? (Question of law and fact) 2. Whether the respondents-income-tax authorities have complied with the statutory formalities prescribed under Section 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, before issuing the impugned notices under Section 148 of the Act, particularly for notices issued on or after April 1, 2021? (Question of law and fact) 3. Whether Explanations A(a)(ii)/A(b) to Notification No. 20 [S.O. 1432 (E) dated 31st March 2021] and Notification No. 38 [S.O.1703(E) dated 27th April 2021], to the extent they extend the applicability of the provisions of Section 148, Section 149, and Section 151 of the Act as they stood on March 31, 2021, beyond March 31, 2021, are ultra vires the parent legislation, namely, The Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020? (Question of law) Assessee's Contentions: The assessees argued that the notices are barred by limitation and that the mandatory procedural requirements of Section 148A were not followed. They also contended that the Explanations to the Notifications extending the old provisions beyond March 31, 2021, are ultra vires the Relaxation Act, 2020. They relied on decisions of the Allahabad High Court in Ashok Kumar Agarwal, Rajasthan High Court in Bpip Infra Private Limited, Delhi High Court in Man Mohan Kohli, and this Court in Manoj Jain and Bagaria Properties and Investment Private Limited. Revenue's Contentions: The judgment records no specific contentions for the revenue.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
order. Common facts and issues are involved in all these writ petitions as appear on perusal of relevant record, and 2 upon considering the submissions of the parties it appears that the petitioners are aggrieved by the issuance of the impugned notices under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the grounds that the same are barred by limitation, and that the respondents-income-tax authorities concerned, before issuing the impugned notices under section 148 of the 1961 Act, have not observed the statutory formalities under section 148A of the 1961 Act as prescribed by the Finance Act, 2021 which are applicable with effect from 1st April 2021 before issuance of notices under section 148 of the 1961 Act on or after 1st April 2021. Issues arising in all the present writ petitions are purely legal, and in all these writ petitions the assessees/petitioners have sought relief of quashing of the impugned re-assessment notices issued post-31st March 2021 by the respondents-income tax authorities concerned under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Assessees/petitioners have also sought relief by way of a declaration declaring Explanations A(a)(ii)/A(b) to Notification No. 20 [S.O. 1432 (E) dated 31st March 2021] and Notification No.38 [S.O.1703(E) dated 27th April 2021] to the extent that the same extend the applicability of the “provisions of section 148, section 149 and section 151 of the Act, as the case may be, as they stood as on 31st March 2021, before commencement of the Finance Act, 2021” to the period beyond 31st March 2021 as ultra vires the parent legislation, viz., The Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 (hereinafter referred to as “Relaxation Act, 2020”). At the outset, all the counsel appearing for the parties jointly submitted that the issues involved in these writ petitions are covered by the decision of the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court dated September 30,
3 2021 in the case of Ashok Kumar Agarwal-vs-Union of India, through its Revenue Secretary, North Block & Ors. (Writ Tax No. 524/2021) decided in favour of the assessees/petitioners, and an order of Rajasthan High Court dated November 25, 2021 in the case of Bpip Infra Private Limited-vs-Income Tax Officer, Ward 4(1), Jaipur (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.13297/2021) and an order of the Delhi High Court dated December 15, 2021 in the case of Man Mohan Kohli-vs-Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. [W.P. (C) 6176 of 2021] and a judgement and order of this court dated January 17, 2022 in the case of Manoj Jain-vs-Union of India & Ors. in WPA No.11950 of 2021 and also in the case of Bagaria Properties and Investment Private Limited & Anr. in WPO No.244 of 2021. In view of the judgements and orders of this court dated January 17, 2022 in the case of Manoj Jain-vs-Union of India & Ors. in WPA No.11950 of 2021 and in the case of Bagaria Properties and Investment Private Limited & Anr. in WPO No.244 of 2021, all these writ petitions herein are disposed of by allowing the same. Explanations A(a)(ii)/A(b) to the notifications dated March 31, 2021 and April 27, 2021 are declared to be ultra vires the Relaxation Act, 2020 and are, therefore, bad in law and null void. All the impugned notices under section 148 of the Income Tax, 1961 are quashed with liberty to the assessing officers concerned to initiate fresh re-assessment proceedings in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Act as amended by the Finance Act, 2021 and after making compliance of the formalities as required by the law. [Md. Nizamuddin, J]
4
More judgments on Section 148
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
- Adj Agri International LLP, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), RajkotITA 1198/RJT/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Ashish Enterprises vs. Assistant Commissioner Gsto Ward No. 86Delhi · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Om.S.R. Construction, Through Its Proprietor Mr. Kuldeep Sharma vs. The State Of Jharkhand Through Its Commissioner, Commerical Tax DepartmentJharkhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bhanwal Trading And Company vs. The Union Of INDIARajasthan · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Saraswati Enterprises vs. State Of RajasthanRajasthan · 28 Oct 2026
- Akshaya Consortium vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026