GE CAPITAL GLOBAL ENERGY INVESTMENTS BV vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR.

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/14137/2025HC DelhiDLHC01067478202512 September 2025Bench: 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 held that the Assessing Officer (AO) had failed to provide any findings on the reply submitted by the assessee in response to the notice under Section 148A(1). The Court found the AO's order dated 30.06.2025, which led to the issuance of the notice under Section 148, to be untenable on this ground. Consequently, the Court set aside the AO's order dated 30.06.2025 and the consequent notice dated 30.06.2025. The matter was remanded back to the AO with a direction to consider the assessee's reply dated 24.04.2025 and pass a reasoned order within twelve weeks, addressing all contentions raised by the assessee. The AO was also permitted to seek further information or documents from the assessee and was directed to grant a personal hearing to the assessee. The ratio decidendi is that an AO must provide findings on the assessee's reply before issuing a notice under Section 148, adhering to principles of natural justice and statutory requirements.

What were the facts?

The assessee, GE Capital Global Energy Investments BV, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court challenging a notice dated 31.03.2025 issued under Section 148A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for assessment year 2019-20. The assessee had submitted a reply to this notice on 24.04.2025. The assessee contended that the Assessing Officer (AO), while passing an order under Section 148A(3) and issuing a consequent notice under Section 148 on 30.06.2025, failed to provide any findings on the contentions raised in the assessee's reply. The revenue was represented by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and another respondent.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Assessing Officer erred in passing an order under Section 148A(3) and issuing a notice under Section 148 for assessment year 2019-20 without providing any findings on the reply submitted by the assessee, thereby violating the principles of natural justice and the provisions of Section 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961? Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the AO's order under Section 148A(3) was untenable as it did not address the stand taken in the assessee's reply dated 24.04.2025, and consequently, the notice dated 30.06.2025 under Section 148 was improperly issued. The assessee relied on paragraphs 6, 7.1, and 8 of its paper book to support this contention. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through its Senior Standing Counsel, was unable to contest the submission made by the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~59 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 14137/2025 CM APPL. 58035/2025 GE CAPITAL GLOBAL ENERGY INVESTMENTS BV .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Aditya Vohra and Mr. Tanmay Dhakras Advs. versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Vipul Agrawal (Sr. SC) with Ms. Sakshi Shairwal, Mr. Akshat Singh (Jr. SCs), Mr. Gaoraang Ranajn and Ms. Harshita Kotru (Advs.). CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RENU BHATNAGAR O R D E R % 12.09.2025 CM APPL. 58036/2025 (Exem.) 1. Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions 2. The application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) 14137/2025 CM APPL. 58035/2025 3. This petition has been filed with the following prayers: “a) a writ in the nature of certiorari/ mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing the notice dated 31.03.2025 issued under section 148A(1) of the Act for assessment year 2019- 20; b) a writ in the nature of certiorari/ mandamus or any other appropriate writ, 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 18/09/2025 at 12:26:02

order or direction for quashing the order dated 30.06.2025 passed by Respondent No.1 under section 148A(3) and the consequent initiation of reassessment proceedings vide notice dated 30.06.2025 issued under section 148 of the Act for assessment year 2019-20; c) grant ad-interim stay of the reassessment proceedings undertaken by Respondent No.1 under section 148 read with section 148A pursuant to the notice dated 30.06.2025 issued under section 148 of the Act for the assessment year 2019-20, pending final disposal of the present writ petition; and d) Such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 4. One of the submissions of Mr. Ajay Vohra, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner is that pursuant to the receipt of notice dated 31.03.2025 under Section 148A(1) of the Income Tax Act 1961, (the Act), the petitioner had submitted a detailed reply to the same on 24.04.2025. Unfortunately, the Assessing Officer while passing the order under 148A(3) of the Act has not given any finding on the stand taken by the petitioner in its reply. In support of his submission, Mr. Vohra has drawn our attention to page 69 of the paper book more specifically paragraphs 6, 7.1 and 8 to contend that without drawing a conclusion, the AO has decided to issue notice dated 30.06.2025 under Section 148 of the Act, which is clearly untenable. 5. Mr. Vipul Agrawal, Sr. Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent is unable to contest the submission made by Mr. Vohra. If that be so, we set aside the order dated 30.06.2025 passed by the Assessing Officer so also the notice dated 30.06.2025 and remand the matter back to 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 18/09/2025 at 12:26:02

the Assessing Officer, who shall consider the reply filed by the petitioner and pass a reasoned order within twelve weeks from today dealing with all the contentions raised by the petitioner in its reply dated 24.04.2025. The Assessing Officer is not precluded from seeking such information/documents from the petitioner as he deem appropriate. 6. Keeping in view the facts in this petition, we deem it appropriate to direct that a personal hearing shall be granted to the petitioner through its representative by the Assessing Officer. 7. Petition disposed of. V. KAMESWAR RAO, J RENU BHATNAGAR, J SEPTEMBER 12, 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 18/09/2025 at 12:26:02

More judgments on Section 148A

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

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →