SUBHASH CHAND SINGHAL vs. PCIT, DELHI-12 & ORS.

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/5130/2025HC DelhiDLHC01022649202520 August 2025Author: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court set aside the Assessment Order dated March 25, 2025. The Court accepted the submission of the revenue that the Assessing Officer (AO) was prepared to grant the petitioner one more opportunity to present their case. The AO was directed to provide a hearing to the petitioner's representative, either virtually or otherwise, on a date and time to be communicated to the petitioner through E-mail and the ITBA portal. The entire process, including the hearing and subsequent order, was to be completed within six weeks from the date of the order. The Court clarified that by virtue of this order, the petitioner would be precluded from raising the plea of limitation for passing the assessment order. The petition was disposed of on these terms.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Subhash Chand Singhal, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court challenging orders and notices related to reassessment proceedings for Assessment Year (AY) 2019-20. The impugned orders included those under Section 148A(d), Section 148, Section 147, Section 151, and the final Assessment Order under Section 147 read with Section 144, along with a Notice of Demand under Section 156 and penalty proceedings. The petitioner contended that the principles of natural justice were violated as a notice of hearing dated March 12, 2025, for March 13, 2025, was not received and was not available on the ITBA portal, denying him a fair opportunity.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the reassessment proceedings initiated for AY 2019-20, including the order under Section 148A(d) and notice under Section 148, are liable to be quashed on the grounds of violation of principles of natural justice, specifically the non-receipt of a hearing notice and its absence on the ITBA portal? (Question of law and fact, turning on Sections 148A, 148, and principles of natural justice). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the non-receipt of the hearing notice dated March 12, 2025, for March 13, 2025, and its unavailability on the ITBA portal constituted a violation of natural justice, leading to an unfair assessment order dated March 25, 2025. Revenue's Contention: The respondent (revenue) conveyed through their counsel that the Assessing Officer (AO) was willing to grant the petitioner one more opportunity to make submissions virtually on a date and time to be communicated via email and the ITBA portal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 148,Section 147,Section 151,Section 144,Section 156,Section 270A,Section 271AAC,Section 272A(1)(d)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
$~131 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5130/2025, CM APPL. 23407/2025 SUBHASH CHAND SINGHAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Ramesh Kumar Jain and Mr. Mudit Bansal, Advs. versus PCIT, DELHI-12 & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar, SSC with Ms. Monica Benjamin and Ms. Easha, JSCs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

O R D E R %

20.08.

2025

1.

This petition has been filed with the following prayers: “a) issue a Writ of Certiorari or a Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, Order or direction, calling for the records of the Petitioner's case and after going into the legality and propriety thereof, to quash and set aside the impugned Order under Section 148A(d) and impugned Notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 both dated 17.04.2023 for the AY 2019-20; b) issue a Writ of Certiorari or a Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, Order or direction, setting aside the reassessment proceedings initiated under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the AY 2019-20; c) issue a Writ of Certiorari or a Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, Order or direction, setting aside the unsigned approval under Section 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and any proceedings initiated pursuant thereto for the AY 2019-20; d) issue a Writ of Mandamus or a Writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or direction, quashing the impugned Assessment Order under This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 29/08/2025 at 12:46:07

Section 147 r.w.s.144 and Notice of Demand under Section 156 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, both dated 25.03.2025, and Penalty proceedings initiated pursuant thereto for the AY 2019-20; e) issue a Writ of and/or order and/or direction in the nature of prohibition commanding Respondent to forebear from giving effect to and/or taking any step whatsoever pursuant to and/or in furtherance of the Notice of Demand under Section 156 and penalty proceedings initiated under Sections 270A, 271AAC, and 272A(1)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the AY 2019-20; f) issue a Writ of Certiorari, Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or direction for initiation of suitable administrative action against the erring officer being the impugned Assessment Order was issued with gross non- application of mind and gross negligence; g) impose exemplary costs upon the Respondent No.2 for passing high-pitched assessment order in violation of the principles of natural justice and contrary to the facts and law of the matter;”

2.

One of the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the respondents while passing the order under Section 148A(d) and issuing notice under Section 148 and also the Assessment Order dated 25.03.2025 have violated the principles of natural justice. According to him, the notice of hearing which was said to have been issued on 12.03.2025 for 13.03.2025 at 12:30 PM was not received by the petitioner and the same was not available on Income Tax Business Application (ITBA) portal. This amounts to denial of fair opportunity to the petitioner during the re-assessment proceedings which ultimately resulted in the order of assessment dated 25.03.2025. On this, the learned counsel for respondent states that she has instructions to convey to the Court that the Assessing Officer (AO) is ready and willing to grant one more opportunity to the petitioner to apply through virtual mode and make submissions through his representative on the date This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 29/08/2025 at 12:46:07

and time to be conveyed by the Assessing Officer to the petitioner through E-mail and ITBA portal.

3.

If that be so, the order dated 25.03.2025 is set aside. The Assessment Officer shall give a hearing to the representative of the petitioner on the date and time fixed and thereafter proceed in accordance with law. This process shall be completed within six weeks as an outer limit.

4.

The petition is disposed of.

5.

It is made clear that, as the assessment order shall be passed on the strength of this Order, the petitioner shall be precluded from advancing the plea of limitation to pass the Assessment order. V. KAMESWAR RAO, J VINOD KUMAR, J AUGUST 20, 2025 ss This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 29/08/2025 at 12:46:07

More judgments on Section 148A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →