NAYANTARA SUPPLIERS PVT LTD vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that in compliance with its earlier orders and taking note of the Supreme Court's judgment dated May 4, 2022, in the case of Union of India & Ors. V. Ashish Agarwal, the impugned notices under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and all proceedings under Section 147 of the old Act, which were quashed with liberty to the assessing officer to proceed in accordance with law, would now be treated as per the law and guidelines laid down in the aforesaid Supreme Court judgment. The Court quoted paragraphs 10, 11, and 12 of the Supreme Court's judgment, which inter alia directed that impugned Section 148 notices issued under the unamended Act shall be deemed to have been issued under Section 148A of the Act and construed as show-cause notices. The assessing officers are to provide information, allow replies, and thereafter pass orders under Section 148A(d), followed by proceedings under Section 148 as substituted. All defenses available to the assessees and revenue under the Finance Act, 2021, and law shall continue to be available. The Supreme Court's order is applicable PAN India and governs pending writ petitions. The High Court directed the respondent-assessing authorities to proceed with the quashed notices and proceedings in accordance with the Supreme Court's order.
What were the facts?
The petitioners, Brubeck Resources Private Limited and others, filed multiple writ petitions before the Calcutta High Court challenging notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and subsequent proceedings under Section 147 of the old Act. These notices and proceedings had been previously quashed by the High Court with liberty to the assessing officer to proceed in accordance with law. The present proceedings were filed to clarify the implications of a Supreme Court judgment dated May 4, 2022, in the case of Union of India & Ors. V. Ashish Agarwal.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the impugned notices under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and all proceedings under Section 147 of the old Act, which were previously quashed by this Court, should now be treated and proceeded with in accordance with the law and guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its judgment dated May 4, 2022, in the case of Union of India & Ors. V. Ashish Agarwal. Assessee's Contention: The petitioners sought clarification that the Supreme Court's order would govern the quashed notices and proceedings, allowing them to be treated as show-cause notices under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as substituted by the Finance Act, 2021, with specific procedural directions. Revenue's Contention: The revenue did not explicitly record any contentions against the application of the Supreme Court's judgment. The High Court's order implies that the revenue would proceed as per the Supreme Court's directions.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Original Side
Present :- Hon’ble Mr. Justice Md. Nizamuddin
W.P.O. No. 1788 of 2022
BRUBECK RESOURCES PRIVATE LIMITED VS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
With
W.P.O. No. 1789 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 1956 of 2022, W.P.O. 1957 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 1958 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 1959 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 1960 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 1961 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 1962 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 1963 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 1964 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 1965 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 1966 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 1967 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 1968 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 1970 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 1971 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 1972 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 1973 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 1974 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 1977 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 1978 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 1979 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 1980 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 1981 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 1985 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 1991 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 1992 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 1993 of 2022, W.P.O. 1994 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 1995 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 1996 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 1997 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 1998 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 2000 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 2012 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 2013 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 2014 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 2015 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 2017 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 2018 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 2019 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 2020 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 2022 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 2023 of 2022.
For the Petitioners :- Ms. Swapna Das, Mr. Siddharth Das, Mr. Hemant Tiwari, Mr. Gopal Ram Sharma, Mr. Brujesh Kumar Singh, Advocates
For the Respondents :-
Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, Mr. Tilak Mitra, Mr. Saurav Chanda, Mr. S. Das, Mr. Aditya Mondal, Mr. Vipul Kundalia, Mr. Om Narayan Rai, Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Advocates
Dated : 05th May, 2022
MD. NIZAMUDDIN, J. In compliance of my earlier orders, petitioner in these writ petitions have paid the costs and filed receipts, which are taken on record. Taking note of a judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated May 4, 2022 in the case of Union of India & Ors. V. Ashish Agarwal in Civil Appeal No. 3005 of 2022, it is clarified that by the earlier orders of this Court, the impugned notices under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and all proceedings under Section 147 of the old Act, which were quashed with liberty to the assessing officer concerned to proceed in accordance with law, would now mean as per the law and guidelines laid down in the aforesaid judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
Paragraphs 10, 11 and 12 of the aforesaid judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which, according to me, have much relevance, are quoted below:-
“10. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, the present Appeals are ALLOWED IN PART. The impugned common judgements and orders passed by the High Court of judicature at Allahabad in W.T. No. 524/2021 and other allied tax appeals/petitions, is/are hereby modified and substituted as under:- (i) The impugned section 148 notices issued to the respective assesses which were issued under unamended section 148 of the IT Act, which were the subject matter of writ petitions before the various respective High Courts shall be deemed to have been issued under section 148A of the IT Act as substituted by the Finance Act, 2021 and construed or treated to be show-cause notices in terms of section 148A(b). The assessing officer shall, within thirty days from today provide to the respective assesses information and material relied upon by the Revenue, so that the assesses can reply to the show- cause notices within two weeks thereafter; (ii) The requirement of conducting any enquiry, if required, with the prior approval of specified authority under Section 148A(a) is hereby dispensed with as a one-time measure vis-à-vis those notices which have been issued under Section 148 of the
unamended Act from 01.04.2021 till date, including those which have been quashed by the High Courts. Even otherwise as observed hereinabove holding any enquiry with the prior approval of specified authority is not mandatory but it is for the concerned Assessing Officers to hold any enquiry, if required; (iii) The assessing officers shall thereafter pass orders in terms of Section 148A(d) in respect of each of the concerned asessees; Thereafter after following the procedure as required under Section 148A may issue under Section 148 (as substituted); (iv) All defences which may be available to the assessees including those available under Section 149 of the IT Act and all rights and contentions which may be available to the concerned assessees and Revenue under the Finance Act, 2021 and in law shall continue to be available. 11. The present order shall be applicable PAN INDIA and all judgements and orders passed by different High Courts on the issue and under which similar notices which were issued after 01.04.2021 issued under Section 148 of the Act are set aside and shall be governed by the present order and shall stand modified to the aforesaid
extent. The present order is passed in exercise of powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India so as to avoid any further appeals by the Revenue on the very issue by challenging similar judgements and orders, with a view not to burden this Court with approximately 9000 appeals. We also observe that present order shall also govern the pending writ petitions, pending before various High Courts in which similar notices under Section 148 of the Act issued after 01.04.2021 are under challenge. 12. The impugned common judgements and orders passed by the High Court of Allahabad and the similar judgements and orders passed by various High Courts, more particularly, the respective judgements and orders passed by the various High Courts particulars of which are mentioned hereinabove, shall stand modified/substituted to the aforesaid extent only.” Accordingly, the respondent-assessing authorities concerned will now proceed with those quashed notices and proceedings in accordance with the law laid down and guidelines as per aforesaid order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
The Registrar Original Side of this Court shall immediately forward a copy of this order to the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, West Bengal and Sikkim who will circulate the same to all the concerned subordinate authorities.
(Md. Nizamuddin, J.)
Sbghosh
More judgments on Section 148
- Bha Associates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs ACIT, Central Circle- 29, New DelhiITA 5208/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: Disposed6 Nov 2026AY 2015-16
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Pramod Kumar Behera vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 4 Nov 2026
- Santosh Kumar Pradhan (Late Biswabhar Pradhan) vs. The Chief Commissioner, CGST And Central Excise And Customs, BhubaneswarOrissa · 4 Nov 2026
- Mrs. Sharma Glass And Plywoods vs. The Commercial Tax OfficerKarnataka · 4 Nov 2026
- Sri Mohanraj vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial TaxesKarnataka · 4 Nov 2026
- Shobha Kumari vs. State Of Bihar And AnrPatna · 3 Nov 2026