FOSUN PHARMA INDUSTRIAL PTE. LTD vs. ASSISTANT/ DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR.

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/15542/2025HC DelhiDLHC01077537202510 October 2025Author: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court set aside the impugned order under Section 148A(3) and the notice under Section 148, both dated June 28, 2025. The Court disposed of the petition on the terms that the matter be remanded back to the Assessing Officer (AO). This was based on the revenue's plea that the issue could be considered by the AO if the petitioner filed all necessary documents. The petitioner agreed to file the required documents within three weeks. The AO, upon receipt of these documents, is to consider them and pass a reasoned order under Section 148A(3) and proceed thereafter. The petitioner will be given an opportunity of hearing by the AO. The Court did not decide on the merits of the alleged transaction but facilitated a procedural re-examination.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Fosun Pharma Industrial Pte. Ltd., filed a writ petition challenging a show-cause notice dated March 30, 2025, an order dated June 28, 2025, under Section 148A(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and a reassessment notice dated June 28, 2025, for assessment year 2019-20. The petitioner contended that the show-cause notice alleged receipt of Rs. 43,24,65,18,408/- in AY 2019-20, which was incorrect as no such transaction occurred in that year. However, the petitioner conceded that a financial transaction did take place in AY 2018-19. The revenue argued that this specific contention was not raised in the petitioner's reply to the show-cause notice.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the show-cause notice dated 30.03.2025, the order dated 28.06.2025 under Section 148A(3), and the reassessment notice dated 28.06.2025 issued to the petitioner for AY 2019-20 are liable to be quashed, turning on Section 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the impugned notices and order were perverse because the alleged transaction of Rs. 43,24,65,18,408/- did not occur in AY 2019-20, although it did occur in AY 2018-19. Therefore, the order and notice based on the incorrect assessment year should be set aside. Revenue's Contention: The revenue contended that the petitioner's argument that the transaction occurred in AY 2018-19, not AY 2019-20, was not raised in the petitioner's reply dated 16.04.2025 to the Section 148A(1) notice. The revenue pointed to the Assessing Officer's observation that the assessee failed to furnish supporting documents and that the case needed further examination.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 148A(1),Section 148A(3),Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

W.P. (C) 15542/2025 $~21 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI %

Date of Decision : 10.10.2025 + W.P.(C) 15542/2025 FOSUN PHARMA INDUSTRIAL PTE. LTD .....Petitioner Through: Mr Ajay Vohra, Sr Advocate with Ms Shloka Narayanan, Advocate. versus ASSISTANT/ DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Indruj Singh Rai, SSC, Mr. Sanjeev Menon, Mr. Rahul Singh, JSCs and Mr. Gaurav Kumar, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR V. KAMESWAR RAO, J. (ORAL) CM APPL. 63588/2025(Exemption)

1.

Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2.

The application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) 15542/2025 & CM APPL. 63587/2025

3.

The present petition has been filed with the following prayers:- “(I) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari/ mandamus or W.P. (C) 15542/2025 any other appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing: (a) show-cause notice dated 30.03.2025 issued by Respondent No.1 under section 148A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (’the Act’); (b) order dated 28.06.2025 passed by Respondent No.1 under section 148A(3) of the Act with prior approval of Respondent No.2; (c) reassessment notice dated 28.06.2025 issued by Respondent No.1 under section 148 of the Act; in the case of the Petitioner for assessment year 2019-20, and all proceedings/ actions consequent thereto; (II) stay effect and operation of impugned reassessment notice dated 28.06.2025 issued by Respondent No.1 and all consequential proceedings undertaken thereafter in the case of the Petitioner for the assessment year 2019-20, during pendency of the present petition; (III) grant ad-interim ex-parte relief in terms of prayer (II) above; (IV) call for the records of the case from the Respondents;”

4.

The challenge is primarily to the order dated 28.06.2025 passed under Section 148A(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) followed by notice under Section 148 of the Act of the same date.

5.

The submission of Mr Ajay Vohra, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner is that the notice and order which have been passed by the respondents are totally perverse. According to him, the show cause notice was issued primarily alleging that an amount of Rs. 43,24,65,18,408/- was received in the Assessment Year (AY) 2019-20, which is incorrect as no such transaction has actually taken place in the AY 2019-20. However, he conceded to the fact that the financial transaction has taken place in the AY 2018-19, hence the order was passed under Section 148A(3) of the Act, on W.P. (C) 15542/2025 the premise that transaction has taken place in AY 2019-20 is liable to the set aside, along with notice.

6.

Mr Rai, learned counsel for the respondents would submit that what has been contended by Mr Vohra today before this Court was not the case of the petitioner in their reply dated 16.04.2025, to the notice issued under Section 148A(1) of the Act. In this regard, he has drawn our attention to page no.108 of the paperbook, more specifically the paragraph, which reads as under:- “We wish to bring to your attention that during the captioned AY 2019-20, the Company has not entered into any of the transactions mentioned in the show-cause notice issued under section 148A(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 dated March 30, 2025. Therefore, the details sought in the notice are not applicable.”

7.

In other words, it is his submission that, if the petitioner had contended the manner in which Mr Vohra had contended today, the Assessing Officer (AO) would have considered the said plea and come to a conclusion in an appropriate manner. According to him, it is for this reason, the AO in paragraphs 6.5 and 6.6 has stated as under:- “6. 5. The assessee has failed to furnish bank statements or any other supporting documents to substantiate their claim of not having entered into the aforementioned transactions. It is to be noted that no relevant financial records, receipts, or corroborative materials have been provided, leaving the assertion unsupported and raising concerns about the accuracy of their claims regarding the transactions in question.

6.

6 It can be said that the assessee has no supporting documents to justify their claim that they have not entered into any of the transactions as mentioned in the show cause W.P. (C) 15542/2025 notice. Reliance has been placed on the information available as per RMS of CBDT. It is to be noted that instant case needs further examination.”

8.

He states that, appropriate shall be that the matter be remanded back to the AO by setting aside the impugned order and notice dated 28.06.2025 for the consideration of the AO, provided that the petitioner files all the necessary documents for his consideration. On this plea of Mr Rai, Mr Vohra submits that, all the necessary documents shall be filed before the AO within a period of three weeks from today.

9.

If that so, the AO on receipt of the said documents, shall consider the same and pass a reasoned order under Section 143A(3) of the Act and then proceed in accordance with law. As prayed for by Mr Vohra, the AO shall give an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner on the date and time, to be notified to the petitioner in advance.

10.

The impugned order under Section 148A(3) of the Act and along with the notice under Section 148 of the Act dated 28.06.2025 are set aside. The petition is disposed of on the above terms. The pending application stands dismissed as infructuous. V. KAMESWAR RAO, J VINOD KUMAR, J OCTOBER 10, 2025 M

More judgments on Section 148A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →