MIRZA QAMARUL HASAN BEG vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 16, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/7306/2025HC DelhiDLHC01033713202529 July 2025Author: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR5 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the Assessing Officer (AO) cannot proceed with any assessment in relation to AY 2014-15 as it is barred by limitation. The Court relied on its earlier decision in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-Central-1 v. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd., which clarified that the ten-year block period under Section 153A is to be computed from the end of the assessment year relevant to the financial year in which the search was conducted or requisition made. The Court noted that the Revenue did not dispute the tabular chart presented by the petitioner, which depicted AY 2014-15 as falling outside the ten-year block period when computed from the date of search (February 15, 2024). The Revenue's submission that they have not accepted the manner of calculation as explained in Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. and have filed an SLP was not sufficient to alter the present decision. Consequently, the petition was allowed, and the impugned notice dated March 22, 2025, issued under Section 148, was set aside. The pending application was also disposed of.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Mirza Qamarul Hasan Beg, filed a writ petition challenging a notice dated March 22, 2025, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year (AY) 2014-15. The petitioner argued that the notice was time-barred. The proceedings were initiated pursuant to a search under Section 132. The petitioner contended that under the pre-amended provisions of Section 153A, read with Explanation-I to the fourth proviso, the ten-year block period for assessment should be computed from the end of the assessment year relevant to the financial year in which the search took place. The search occurred on February 15, 2024. The Revenue argued that AY 2014-15 falls within the ten-year period as per Section 153C read with Section 153A of the Act, considering the search was conducted on February 15, 2024.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice dated March 22, 2025, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2014-15 is barred by limitation, considering the provisions of Section 149(1) proviso and Section 153A read with Explanation-I to the fourth proviso (pre-amended provisions)? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the notice is beyond the period of limitation. Applying the pre-amended provisions and considering the search under Section 132, the limitation provisions in erstwhile Section 153A are applicable. The ten-year block period, computed from the end of the assessment year relevant to the financial year in which the search took place (February 15, 2024), means AY 2014-15 is barred by limitation. Reliance was placed on the High Court's decision in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-Central-1 v. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue contended that provisions of Section 147 to 151 as they stood before the Finance Act 2024 are applicable. Under the pre-amended law, a notice could be issued to a non-searched person for up to ten years from the end of the relevant assessment year in which the search was conducted, as per Section 153C read with Section 153A. AY 2014-15 is covered within this ten-year period, making the action justifiable. Incriminating material was found during the search.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 149(1),Section 153A,Section 153C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

W.P. (C) 7306/2025 $~73 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%

Date of Decision : 29.07.2025

+ MIRZA QAMARUL HASAN BEG

.....Petitioner Through: Mr Gaurav Jain and Mr Shubham Gupta, Advocates.

versus

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 16, DELHI

.....Respondent Through: Mr Vipul Agrawal, SCC, Ms Sakshi Shairwal, Mr Akshat Singh, JSCs, Mr Gauraang Ranjan and Ms Harshita, Advocate.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J. (ORAL)

CM APPL. 45063/2025(condn of delay in filing counter affidavit)

1.

For the reasons stated in the application, the delay of 56 days in filing the counter affidavit stands condoned. The counter affidavit is taken on the record.

2.

The application stands disposed of.

3.

With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, we have heard W.P. (C) 7306/2025 this petition for disposal.

4.

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner, inter alia, with the following prayers:- “A. Writ of and/or order and/or directions in the nature of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing the notice dated 22.03.2025, u/s 148 of the Act for the assessment year 2014-15 and proceedings initiated pursuant thereto; B. 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 said purported notice under section 148 of the Act and/or in any proceedings initiated thereunder for the assessment year 2014-15;”

5.

This petition concerns the Assessment Year (AY) 2014-15. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the impugned notice 22.03.2025 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) is beyond the period of limitation as prescribed in proviso to Section 149(1) of the Act. According to him, applying the pre-amended provisions, considering that the impugned proceedings were initiated pursuant to search under Section 132, the limitation provisions contained in erstwhile Section 153A shall be applicable. In terms of the erstwhile provisions of Section 153A read with Explanation-I to fourth proviso thereof, the impugned assessment falling beyond 10th assessment years i.e., AY 2024-25 in which search took place, that is 15.02.2024, the proceedings for AY 2014-15, are barred by limitation.

6.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon various W.P. (C) 7306/2025 judgments, for which he has filed compilation, including the decision of this Court in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-Central-1 v. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. : Neutral Citation No.2024:DHC:2629-DB, which had explained the block period of ten years as required to be computed from the end of the assessment year relevant to the Financial Year in which the Assessing Officer (AO) of the searched person has recorded his satisfaction and handed over the material and books of account to the AO of the assessee.

7.

On the other hand it is submitted by the learned counsel for the Revenue that provisions of Section 147 to 151 as they stood before the commencement of the Finance Act 2024 are applicable in this case. Under the pre-amended law Notice could be issued to the non-searched person for a period upto ten years from the end of relevant assessment year in which search was conducted as per Section 153C read with Section 153A of the Act. In the present case AY 2014-15 would be covered within the period of ten years and hence action is justifiable. He states during the course of the search, certain incriminating material was found, which was received by the AO exercising jurisdiction in the case of the petitioner.

8.

Thus, an issue has arisen, as to how the block period of ten years, is required to be computed. As per the chart filed by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the following position is depicted: Computation of the ten-year block period as provided under Section 153A of the Act – date of Search 15.02.2024 No. of years AY 2024-25 [Assessment year relevant to the year of search] 1 W.P. (C) 7306/2025 AY 2023-24 2 AY 2022-23 3 AY 2021-22 4 AY 2020-21 5 AY 2019-20 6 AY 2018-19 7 AY 2017-18 8 AY 2016-17 9 AY 2015-16 10 AY 2014-15 Barred by Limitation

9.

The learned counsel for the Revenue does not dispute the tabular chart/statement, as reproduced above. He however, submits that the Revenue has not accepted the manner of calculating the block of ten years as has been explained in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-Central-1 v. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd (supra) and has preferred an Special Leave Petition against the said decision. We may note in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-I v. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd., (supra), this Court has held as under:- “....

89.

That takes us then to the issue of identifying the “relevant assessment year” for the purposes of computing the ten year block. Explanation 1 to Section 153A specifies the manner in which the entire ten AY period is to be computed. While the computation of six AYs’ follows the position as enunciated and identified above, Explanation 1 prescribes that the ten AYs’ would have to be computed from the end of the AY relevant to the FY in which the search was conducted or requisition made. The ten AY period consequently is to be reckoned from the end of the AY pertaining to the previous year in which the search was conducted as distinct from the preceding year which is spoken of in the case of the six relevant AYs’......”

10.

In view of the above, it is apparent that the AO cannot proceed to take W.P. (C) 7306/2025 any steps for assessment in relation to AY 2014-15 as the same is barred by limitation. The present petition is allowed and the impugned notice dated 22.03.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Act, is set aside. The pending application is also disposed of.

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J

VINOD KUMAR, J

JULY 29, 2025 M

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →