RASHDHARA REALESTATES PVT LTD. vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court, in view of the judgment and order dated January 17, 2022, in the cases of Manoj Jain Vs. Union of India & Ors. and Bagaria Properties and Investment Private Limited & Anr., disposed of all the writ petitions by allowing them. The court declared Explanations A(a)(ii)/A(b) to the Notifications dated March 31, 2021, and April 27, 2021, to be ultra vires the Relaxation Act, 2020, and consequently held them to be bad in law and null and void. All the impugned notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act were quashed. The Assessing Officers were granted liberty to initiate fresh re-assessment proceedings in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Act as amended by the Finance Act, 2021, and after complying with the required legal formalities. The ratio decidendi is that the extension of pre-amended reassessment provisions beyond March 31, 2021, through notifications, was beyond the scope of the enabling Relaxation Act, 2020.
What were the facts?
The petitioners, Lakshmi Hospitality and Farms Pvt Ltd and others, are aggrieved by notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. They contend that these notices are barred by limitation and that the respondent Income Tax Authority failed to observe the statutory formalities prescribed under Section 148A of the Act, which became applicable from April 1, 2021. The petitioners are challenging the validity of Explanations A(a)(ii)/A(b) to Notifications No. 20 and 38, which extended the applicability of Section 148, Section 149, and Section 151 as they stood before the Finance Act, 2021, to periods beyond March 31, 2021. They argue these notifications are ultra vires the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the impugned notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, post-March 31, 2021, are barred by limitation and invalid due to non-compliance with Section 148A of the Act, as amended by the Finance Act, 2021? (Question of law and fact, concerning Section 148 and 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961). 2. Whether Explanations A(a)(ii)/A(b) to Notification No. 20 (dated March 31, 2021) and Notification No. 38 (dated April 27, 2021), to the extent they extend the applicability of Sections 148, 149, and 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as they stood on March 31, 2021, to the period beyond March 31, 2021, are ultra vires the parent legislation, namely, The Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020? (Question of law, concerning the parent Act and the Notifications). Assessee's Contentions: The notices are barred by limitation and issued without observing mandatory Section 148A formalities. The Explanations in the Notifications are ultra vires the Relaxation Act, 2020. They rely on decisions of the Allahabad High Court in 'Ashok Kumar Agarwal', Rajasthan High Court in 'Bpip Infra Private Limited', Delhi High Court in 'Man Mohan Kohli', and their own High Court in 'Manoj Jain' and 'Bagaria Properites and Investment Private Limited'. Revenue's Contentions: No specific contentions are recorded for the revenue in the judgment.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
1 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Original Side Present :- Hon’ble Mr. Justice Md. Nizamuddin W.P.O. No. 939 of 2022 LAKSHMI HOSPITALITY AND FARMS PVT LTD Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. With W.P.O. No. 940 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 944 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 945 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 946 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 947 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 948 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 949 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 950 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 951 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 952 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 953 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 954 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 955 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 956 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 957 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 958 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 959 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 960 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 961 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 962 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 963 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 964 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 965 of 2022, W.P.O. No. 966 of 2022, WPO 968 of 2022 For the Petitioners :- Ms. Swapna Das, Mr. Siddharth Das, Mr. Anurag Bagaria, Advocates
For the Respondents :- Mr. Tilak Mitra, Mr. Smarajit Roychowdhury, Mr.Arunava Ganguly, Advocates Dated : 21st February, 2022
MD. NIZAMUDDIN, J. Heard Learned Counsels appearing for the parties. In view of involvement of common question of law and similarity of facts in all these Writ Petitions, with the consent of the parties all these Writ
2 Petitions have been heard together and are being decided by the present common judgement and order. Common facts and issues involved in all these Writ Petitions as appear on perusal of relevant record and upon considering the submissions of the parties are that the petitioners are aggrieved by the issuance of impugned notices under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the ground that the same are barred by limitation and the respondent Income Tax Authority concerned, before issuing the impugned notices under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, have not observed the statutory formalities under Section 148 A of the Income Tax Act as prescribed by the Finance Act, 2021 which are applicable with effect from 1st April, 2021 before issuance of notices under Section 148 of the Act on or after 1st April, 2021. Issues arising in all the present Writ Petitions are purely legal and in all these Writ Petitions the assessees/petitioners have sought relief of quashing of the impugned re-assessment notices issued post 31st March, 2021 by the respondent Income Tax Authority concerned under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, assessees/petitioners have also sought relief by way of a declaration declaring Explanations A(a)(ii)/A(b) to the Notification No. 20 [S.O. 1432 (E) dated 31st March, 2021 and Notification No. 38 [S.O.1703 (E)] dated 27th April, 2021 to the extent that the same extend the applicability of the “provisions of Section 148, Section 149 and Section 151 of the Act, as the case may be, as they stood as on the 31st March, 2021, before the commencement of the Finance Act, 2021” to the period beyond 31st March, 2021 as ultra vires the parent legislation, viz., The Taxation and Other Laws
3 (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 (hereinafter referred to as ‘ Relaxation Act, 2020’). At the outset, all the counsels appearing for the parties jointly submitted that the issues involved in these Writ Petitions are covered by the decision of the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court dated 30th September, 2021 in the case of ‘Ashok Kumar Agarwal –vs- Union of India through its Revenue Secretary North Block & Ors.’ (Writ Tax No. 524/2021) decided in favour of assessees/petitioners on 30.09.2021 and order of Rajasthan High Court dated 25th November, 2021 in the case of Bpip Infra Private Limited-vs.- Income Tax Officer, Ward 4 (1), Jaipur (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13297/2021) and the order of Delhi High Court 15th December, 2021 in the case of Man Mohan Kohli –vs- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. In (W.P. (C) 6176 of 2021) and judgement and order of this Court dated 17th January, 2022 in the case of Manoj Jain Vs. Union of India & Ors. In WPA No. 11950 of 2021 and in the case of Bagaria Properites and Investment Private Limited & Anr. In WPO 244 of 2021. In view of judgement and order of this Court dated 17th January, 2022 in the case of Manoj Jain Vs. Union of India & Ors. In WPA No. 11950 of 2021 and in the case of Bagaria Properties and Investment Private Limited & Anr. in WPO No. 244 of 2021, all these Writ Petitions herein are disposed of by allowing the same. Explanations A(a)(ii)/A(b) to the Notifications dated 31st March, 2021 and 27th April, 2021 are declared to be ultra vires the Relaxation Act, 2020 and are therefore bad in law and null and void. All the impugned notices under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act are quashed
4 with liberty to the Assessing Officers concerned to initiate fresh re- assessment proceedings in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Act as amended by Finance Act, 2021 and after making compliance of the formalities as required by the law. Urgent certified photo copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. (Md. Nizamuddin, J.) TR/
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 →- M/S Kallu Cable vs. The Commissioner State Goods And Service TaxUttarakhand · 5 Nov 2026
- Jishu Suklabaidya vs. The Union Of INDIA And 16 Ors.Gauhati · 4 Nov 2026
- M/S Sun Shine Metal Works vs. State Of U.P And AnotherAllahabad · 4 Nov 2026
- M/S Bansal Sanitary Store vs. State Of U.P. And 2 OthersAllahabad · 4 Nov 2026
- M/S Princess Girls Collection vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 4 Nov 2026