ERNST AND YOUNG U.S. LLP vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 1 2 2 DELHI
What did the High Court hold?
The Delhi High Court held that it would not entertain the writ petitions at this stage because the impugned notice dated March 30, 2025, issued under Section 148A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was in the nature of a show cause notice. The Court clarified that the Assessing Officer should consider the petitioners' response to the notice, which was to be filed within one week from the date of the order, along with the previous decisions of the High Court mentioned by the petitioners. The Court explicitly stated that it was not appropriate to entertain the petitions at this juncture. Consequently, the petitions were dismissed. The court reserved all rights and contentions of the parties. No specific finding was made on the merits of the reasons for issuing the Section 148A(1) notice, as the petitions were dismissed on procedural grounds.
What were the facts?
The petitioners, Ernst and Young U.S. LLP and Ernst and Young EMEIA Services Limited, filed writ petitions before the Delhi High Court. These petitions challenged a notice dated March 30, 2025, issued under Section 148A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2019-20. The petitioners contended that the reasons for issuing this notice were identical to those previously examined by the same court in earlier writ petitions involving the same parties. The respondent is the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle International Taxation 1(2)(2), Delhi.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the High Court should entertain writ petitions challenging a notice issued under Section 148A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which is in the nature of a show cause notice? (Question of law and procedure) Assessee's Contention: The petitioners argued that the impugned notice was based on the same reasons that had already been considered and examined by the High Court in previous writ petitions. They relied on the decisions in W.P.(C) 7578/2023 (Ernst and Young U.S. LLP vs. ACIT) and a related matter involving Ernst and Young EMEIA Services Limited. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contention from the revenue regarding the maintainability of the writ petition or the merits of the notice. However, the court's decision implies that the revenue's position, or at least the court's view, was that the notice was a show cause notice and thus not directly appealable at that stage.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 148A(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
$~126 & 127 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
(126) + W.P.(C) 5056/2025 CM APPL. 23211/2025 CM APPL. 23212/2025
ERNST AND YOUNG U.S. LLP
.....Petitioner Through: Mr. Kamal Sawhney, Mr. Nikhil Agarwal & Mr. Nishank Vashistha, Advocates.
versus
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 1 2 2 DELHI .....Respondent
Through:
(127) + W.P.(C) 5057/2025 CM APPL. 23213/2025 CM APPL. 23214/2025
ERNST AND YOUNG EMEIA SERVICES LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Kamal Sawhney, Mr. Nikhil Agarwal & Mr. Nishank Vashistha, Advocates.
versus
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 1 2 2 DELHI .....Respondent
Through:
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA
22.04.2025 O R D E R 1. The petitioner has filed the present petitions, inter alia, impugning a notice dated 30.03.2025 issued under Section 148A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act] for assessment year 2019-20. 2. It is the Petitioners’ case that the said notice is premised on the same reason which was subject matter of examination by this court in W.P.(C) 7578/2023 captioned ERNST AND YOUNG U.S. LLP vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX as well as ERNST AND YOUNG 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 01/07/2025 at 21:08:15
EMEIA SERVICES LIMITED vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-INTERNATIONAL TAX-1-2-2, DELHI: Neutral Citation 2025:DHC:2124-DB. 3. Considering that the impugned notice is in the nature of a show cause notice, we do not consider it apposite to entertain the present petitions. We, however, clarify that, in the event, the petitioner responds to the said notice within a period of one week from the date, the Assessing Officer shall consider the response as well as the decisions of this Court as mentioned above and pass an appropriate order. 4. In view of the above, the petitions alongwith all the pending applications are dismissed. 5. All rights and contentions of the parties are reserved.
VIBHU BAKHRU, J
TEJAS KARIA, J APRIL 22, 2025/ ‘A’
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 01/07/2025 at 21:08:15
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Amritsar Haveli Cuisines Private Limited & Anr. vs. Amarbir Singh & Ors.Delhi · 3 Nov 2026
- Abd Maestro Private Limited vs. Great Galleon Ventures LTDDelhi · 3 Nov 2026
- Jangeer Singh Trading As Jangeer Singh Kabulshah Agriculture Works vs. Yogesh Jangid Trading As Jangid Agro Engineering & Anr.Delhi · 3 Nov 2026
- Rabindranath Behera vs. The Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, OdishaOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- Dinesh Dash vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
