OM MURTI ISPAT LLP vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 46 (1) DELHI & ORS.

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/14200/2024HC DelhiDLHC01068891202416 December 2024Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA,HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court held that the issue raised by the petitioner was covered against them by a previous decision of the same court in T.K.S. Builders Pvt. Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer Ward 25 (3) New Delhi, Neutral Citation: 2024:DHC:8330-DB. The court did not delve into the merits of other grounds raised by the petitioner, as they were not pressed. Consequently, the petition was dismissed. The court clarified that all rights and contentions of the parties to agitate other issues before the concerned Income Tax Authorities were reserved. The ratio decidendi is that reassessment proceedings initiated by a jurisdictional assessing officer are valid even after the notification for faceless assessments, if supported by precedent.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Om Murti Ispat LLP, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court challenging notices dated August 9, 2024, issued under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, an order dated August 30, 2024, passed under Section 148A(d), and a notice dated August 30, 2024, issued under Section 148 for Assessment Year 2018-19. The petitioner also challenged the prior approval granted by Respondent No. 2. The primary ground for the challenge was that the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) lacked the jurisdiction to initiate reassessment proceedings under Sections 148A and 148 after the CBDT's Notification dated March 29, 2022, mandating faceless reassessment proceedings.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) had the jurisdiction to initiate reassessment proceedings under Section 148A and Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, after the issuance of the CBDT Notification dated March 29, 2022, which mandated faceless reassessment proceedings? (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the JAO lacked jurisdiction to initiate the proceedings due to the faceless assessment regime introduced by the CBDT Notification dated March 29, 2022. Revenue's Contention: The revenue did not explicitly record arguments in the judgment, but the court's decision implies reliance on existing precedents.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 148,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 14200/2024 and CM APPL. 59409/2024 OM MURTI ISPAT LLP .....Petitioner Through: Mr Nischaya Kantoor, Advocate. versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 46 (1) DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr Abhishek Maratha, SSC. CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA O R D E R % 16.12.2024 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, praying as under: “A. Issue a writ of and/or order and or directions in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing impugned notices dated 09.08.2024 issued by Respondent No. 1 under section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), order dated 30.08.2024 passed by Respondent No. 1 under section 148A(d) of the Act, notice dated 30.08.2024 issued by Respondent No. 1 under section 148 of the Act for AY 2018-19, prior approval granted by Respondent No. 2 before passing order under section 148A(d) and all proceedings/ actions consequent to the initiation of reassessment proceedings AND B. Issue writ and/or order and/or direction in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing the initiation of impugned reassessment proceedings for assessment year 2018-19; AND C. Without prejudice to the above, pass an order or direction declaring that explanation 1 to section 148(1) of the act in so far as it considers ‘any information in the case of the assessee for the relevant assessment year in accordance with the risk management strategy 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 20/12/2024 at 12:55:39

formulated by the board from time to time” within the meaning of expression ‘information with the assessing officer which suggests that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment’ and permitting reopening under section 147/148 simply on the basis of such information as manifestly arbitrary and violative of the Constitution of India; 2. The petitioner has premised its challenge to the impugned notices issued under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter the Act) and Section 148 of the Act on the ground that the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) did not have the jurisdiction to initiate the proceedings under Section 148A and 148 of the Act after issuance of the Notification dated 29.03.2022 by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) requiring reassessment proceedings to be conducted in a faceless manner. 3. The said issue is covered against the petitioner by the decision of this court in T.K.S. Builders Pvt. Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer Ward 25 (3) New Delhi, Neutral Citation:2024:DHC:8330-DB. 4. The petitioner has also raised other grounds, however, the petitioner does not seek to press the same in these proceedings while reserving the rights and contentions to urge the same before the concerned authorities. 5. The present petition is accordingly dismissed. 6. It is clarified that all rights and contentions of the parties to agitate the other issues before the concerned Income Tax Authorities, are reserved. VIBHU BAKHRU, ACJ TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J DECEMBER 16, 2024/tr Click here to check corrigendum, if any 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 20/12/2024 at 12:55:39

More judgments on Section 148A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →