BHARPUR SINGLA PROPRIETOR OF B.N. AGRO vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2 DELHI & ANR.

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/11435/2025HC DelhiDLHC01051953202519 August 2025Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR3 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court held that the order dated June 22, 2025, passed under Section 148A(3) and the notice dated June 23, 2025, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, were to be set aside. This decision was based on the Revenue's admission that the extract of the statement, which was mentioned in the notice under Section 148A(1) dated March 27, 2025, was inadvertently not attached. The Court directed that the petitioner would file a reply within four weeks to the extracts of statements already supplied. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer was to pass a fresh order under Section 148A(3) within four weeks thereafter and proceed in accordance with the law. The principle established is that procedural fairness requires the Revenue to provide all material relied upon before passing an order under Section 148A(3).

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Bharpur Singla, proprietor of B.N. Agro, filed a writ petition challenging a notice dated March 27, 2025, issued under Section 148A(1), an order dated June 22, 2025, passed under Section 148A(3), and a notice dated June 23, 2025, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2019-20. The primary ground for challenge was that the order under Section 148A(3) was passed without providing complete information relied upon by the Revenue, despite the notice stating that such information was enclosed. The Revenue, through its counsel, admitted that an extract of a statement mentioned in the Section 148A(1) notice was inadvertently not attached.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the order passed under Section 148A(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is liable to be quashed for non-compliance with the requirement to provide complete information relied upon by the Revenue, as stipulated in the notice under Section 148A(1)? (Question of law and fact, concerning Section 148A(1) and 148A(3)). Assessee's Contention: The order under Section 148A(3) was passed without providing the complete information relied upon by the Revenue, which was stated to be enclosed with the notice under Section 148A(1). Revenue's Contention: The extract of the statement mentioned in the Section 148A(1) notice was inadvertently not attached. The Revenue conceded that the notice under Section 148A(1), the order under Section 148A(3), and the notice under Section 148 should be set aside to allow the petitioner to file a reply to the supplied extracts of statements.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 11435/2025 CM APPL. 46774/2025

BHARPUR SINGLA PROPRIETOR OF B.N. AGRO .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Ruchesh Sinha, Ms Monalisa Maity, Ms Shilpa Choudhary, Ms Upasna Vashistha and Mr. Madhav Gawri, Advocates.

Versus

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2 DELHI & ANR. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Vipul Agrawal, Sr. Standing Counsel.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

O R D E R %

19.08.2025 1. This petition has been filed with the following prayers: “a) 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 impugned notice dated 27.03.2025 issued U/s 148A(1), order dated 22.06.2025 passed U/s 148A(3) and notice dated issued 23.06.2025 passed U/s 148 of the Act for the A.Y. 2019-20 and proceedings initiated pursuant thereto; b) A writ of and/or order and/or direction in the nature of prohibition commanding Respondents to forebear from giving effect to and/or taking any step whatsoever pursuant to and/or in furtherance of the said purported 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 28/08/2025 at 12:22:02

notice under section 148 and order passed under section 148A(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961 and/or in any proceedings initiated thereunder for the assessment year 2019-20; c) such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

2.

One of the grounds for filing this petition and challenging the impugned notice dated 27.03.2025 issued under Section 148A(1), the order dated 22.06.2025 passed under Section 148A(3) and notice dated 23.06.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Act for the Assessment Year 2019-20 is that the order under Section 148A(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was passed without giving the complete information relied upon by the Revenue, which was required to be given in terms of the said notice as the notice clearly states that the information is enclosed along with the notice. 3. Mr. Vipul Agrawal, Senior Standing Counsel, who sought time to take instructions, states that as per the instructions received, the email dated 14.08.2025 states the following :

“In this regard, it is intimated that the assessee has been provided the copy of statements vide ITBA/AST/F/17/2025- 26/1078636295(1) dated 18/07/2025 and copy of the same is attached herewith. Also, it is informed that the extract of the statement as mentioned in Show Cause Notice issued u/s 148A(1) dated 27/03/2025 has not been inadvertently attached with the Notice. A copy of the annexure and Show Cause Notice is also attached for your information. Further, it is pertinent to mention here that 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 28/08/2025 at 12:22:02

the assessee was confronted during the search and the statement was recorded in this regard (copy of which is attached)."

4.

In other words, Mr. Vipul Agrawal, Senior Standing Counsel submits that although the extract of the statement was mentioned in the notice issued under Section 148A(1) dated 27.03.2025, the same was inadvertently not attached to the notice. He states that saving the notice under Section 148A(1), the order passed under Section 148A(3) and the notice issued under Section 148 be set aside, so as to enable the petitioner herein file a reply to the extracts of the statements which have been already supplied to the petitioner. 5. If that be so the petitioner shall file reply within a period of four weeks to enable the Assessing Officer pass a fresh order under Section 148A(3) within four weeks and then proceed in accordance with law. The order dated 22.06.2025 and notice dated 23.06.2025 are set aside. 6. The appeal is disposed of as allowed. The pending application stands disposed of having become infructuous.

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J

VINOD KUMAR, J AUGUST 19, 2025 dd 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 28/08/2025 at 12:22:02

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →