MANOJ KUMAR SAMDARIA vs. ACIT CIRCLE 52-1 NEW DELHI & ANR
What did the High Court hold?
The Delhi High Court held that reassessment notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, post-March 31, 2021, without following the procedure prescribed in the substituted Sections 147 to 151 (w.e.f. April 1, 2021) are invalid. The Court reasoned that the Finance Act, 2021, introduced a new procedural framework for reassessment, and any notice issued after April 1, 2021, must strictly adhere to these new provisions. The Court found that the Explanations A(a)(ii)/A(b) to the Notifications dated March 31, 2021, and April 27, 2021, were ultra vires the Relaxation Act, 2020, and therefore, bad in law and void. The Court rejected the revenue's arguments based on the General Clauses Act and the continued existence of the old power, stating that the new Act manifested an intention to destroy the old procedure. The Court emphasized that parliamentary supremacy in the form of an Act of Parliament (Finance Act, 2021) cannot be undermined by executive notifications. Consequently, all impugned reassessment notices were quashed, and the writ petitions were allowed. The revenue was granted liberty to take further steps if permitted by law.
What were the facts?
The petitioners, including various individuals and private limited companies, filed writ petitions before the Delhi High Court challenging reassessment notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. These notices were issued post-March 31, 2021. The core issue revolved around the applicability of the substituted Sections 147 to 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which came into effect from April 1, 2021, following amendments by the Finance Act, 2021. The petitioners contended that the notices were issued without adhering to the procedural requirements of these new provisions. The revenue, on the other hand, relied on certain notifications and the General Clauses Act to justify the issuance of these notices.
What were the issues?
1. Whether reassessment notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, post-March 31, 2021, without following the procedure prescribed in the substituted Sections 147 to 151 (w.e.f. April 1, 2021) are valid? (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: The petitioners argued that the notices were issued without adhering to the mandatory procedural requirements of the newly substituted Sections 147 to 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which became effective from April 1, 2021. They contended that the Finance Act, 2021, introduced a new regime for reassessment, and any notice issued after the specified date must comply with this new regime. They relied on the judgment in Mon Mohan Kohli vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. Revenue's Contention: The revenue contended that the power of reassessment that existed prior to March 31, 2021, continued to exist till June 30, 2021. They also argued that Section 6 of the General Clauses Act saves notices issued under Section 148 post-March 31, 2021. Furthermore, they relied on Explanations to Notifications dated March 31, 2021, and April 27, 2021, and argued that the substitution made by the Finance Act, 2021, is not applicable to past Assessment Years as it is substantial in nature. They also attempted to rely on the Covid-19 pandemic to argue for non-operation of new provisions.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Heard together (3 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
$~33, 39, 46, 47, 49, 50, 52 to 54, 56 to 66, 70 to 78, 80, 81, 84, 86, 89 & 90 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 33 + W.P.(C) 5019/2022 & CM APPL.14956/2022, CM APPL.14957/2022
DREAM MERCHANT REALTORS PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Gautam Jain with Mr. Piyush
Kumar, Advocates.
versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 7(1) DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Kunal Sharma, Sr. Standing
Counsel with Ms. Zehra Khan, Jr.
Standing Counsel with Mr. Shray
Nargotra, Advocate. 39 + W.P.(C) 5025/2022
RAJINDER SOBTI
..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Rishi Jaiswal with Mr. Divyansh
Jain and Ms. Tanya Minocha,
Advocates.
versus
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-
49(1),DELHI
..... Respondent
Through Mr. Ajit Sharma, Advocate. 46 + W.P.(C) 5040/2022 & CM APPL.14991/2022
LATE ASHOK AGGARWAL THR. LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Ajay Wadhwa with Mr. Sanchil
Jha, Advocates. 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 01/07/2026 at 14:03:39
versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 36(1) NEW DELHI AND ANR. ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Kunal Sharma, Sr. Standing
Counsel with Ms. Zehra Khan, Jr.
Standing Counsel with Mr. Shray
Nargotra, Advocate.
47 + W.P.(C) 5043/2022 & CM APPL.14993/2022, CM APPL.14994/2022
M/S. UNIQUE INFOWAYS P LTD
..... Petitioner
Through Mr. S. Krishnah, Advocate.
versus
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -
25 (1), DELHI AND ORS.
..... Respondents
Through Mr. Puneet Rai, Advocate. 49 + W.P.(C) 5051/2022 & CM APPL.15011/2022, CM APPL.15012/2022
KARMATH INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED ... Petitioner
Through Mr. Upvan Gupta, Advocate.
versus
THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD 14(1) DELHI .... Respondent
Through Mr. Abhishek Maratha, Advocate. 50 + W.P.(C) 5056/2022 & CM APPL.15021/2022, CM APPL.15022/2022
MEHAK NAYER
..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Abhishek Kaushik with
Mr. Vishwa B. Gupta and
Ms. Bhawna Piplani, Advocates.
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 01/07/2026 at 14:03:39
versus
ACIT, CIRCLE 70(1) & ANR.
..... Respondents
Through Mr. Puneet Rai, Advocate. 52 + W.P.(C) 5059/2022 & CM APPL.15026/2022, CM APPL.15027/2022
MPG BUILDCON PVT. LTD.
..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Gautam Jain with Mr. Piyush
Kumar, Advocates.
versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 17(1) DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Abhishek Maratha, Advocate. 53 + W.P.(C) 5061/2022 & CM APPL.15032/2022, CM APPL.15033/2022
MONESH ISRANI
..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Satyen Sethi with Mr. Arta Trana
Panda, Advocates.
versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 28(1), & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Abhishek Maratha, Advocate. 54 + W.P.(C) 5062/2022 & CM APPL.15040/2022
FLAME PROMOTERS PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Piyush Goel, Advocate.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
..... Respondents
Through Mr. Gaurav Sharma with Mr. Naveen
Chawdhary, Advocates for UOI. 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 01/07/2026 at 14:03:39
56 + W.P.(C) 5065/2022 & CM APPL.15048/2022, CM APPL.15049/2022
DELHIVERY LIMITED
..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Prakash Kumar with Ms. Rashmi
Singh, Advocates.
versus
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL
CIRCLE 18, DELHI & ANR.
..... Respondents
Through Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing
Counsel with Mr. Vipul Agrawal and
Mr. Parth Senwal, Jr. Standing
Counsel.
Mr. Sanjeev Uniyal with Mr. Dhawal
Uniyal, Advocates for respondent
No.3.
57 + W.P.(C) 5066/2022 & CM APPL.15050/2022
GLOBAL EMERGING MARKETS INDIA LIMITED ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Ram Avtar Bansal, Advocate.
versus
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Respondent
Through Ms. Vibhooti Malhotra, Advocate.
58 + W.P.(C) 5067/2022 & CM APPL.15052/2022, CM APPL.15053/2022
JASPAL SINGH
..... Petitioner
Through Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate.
versus
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 01/07/2026 at 14:03:39
INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 44(6) DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Sunil Kumar Agarwal, Advocate. 59 + W.P.(C) 5069/2022 & CM APPL.15056/2022, CM APPL.15057/2022
MONESH ISRANI
..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Satyen Sethi with Mr. Arta Trana
Panda, Advocates.
versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 28(1), & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Abhishek Maratha, Advocate.
60 + W.P.(C) 5070/2022 & CM APPL.15059/2022, CM APPL.15060/2022
MANOJ KUMAR JAIN
..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Shailesh Gupta with Mr. Shyam
Sundar, Advocates.
versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 71(1) NEW DELHI AND ANR ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Sunil Kumar Agarwal, Advocate. 62 + W.P.(C) 5075/2022 & CM APPL.15070/2022
LA PLASTPACKS PVT. LTD.
..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Ajay Wadhwa with Mr. Sanchil
Jha, Advocates.
versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 15(1) & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Abhishek Maratha, Advocate.
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 01/07/2026 at 14:03:39
63 + W.P.(C) 5076/2022 & CM APPL.15072/2022, CM APPL.15073/2022
INDO GULF DIAGNOSTIC & RESEARCH CENTRE PRIVATE
LIMITED
..... Petitioner
Through Ms. Kanika Sinha with Ms. Maiteryi
Joshi, Advocates.
versus
DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6, DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Sunil Kumar Agarwal, Advocate. 64 + W.P.(C) 5079/2022 & CM APPL.15081/2022, CM APPL.15082/2022
DEVAPRIYA MAJUMDAR
..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Nitin Gultai, Advocate.
versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-61(1),DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Kunal Sharma, Sr. Standing
Counsel with Ms. Zehra Khan, Jr.
Standing Counsel with Mr. Shray
Nargotra, Advocate. 65 + W.P.(C) 5080/2022 & CM APPL.15090/2022
BIRD TRAVELS PRIVATE LIMITED
..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Mayank Nagi with Mr. Pulkit
Verma, Advocates.
versus
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 4(2)
DELHI & ORS.
..... Respondent
Through Mr. Kunal Sharma, Sr. Standing
Counsel with Ms. Zehra Khan, Jr. 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 01/07/2026 at 14:03:39
Standing Counsel with Mr. Shray
Nargotra, Advocate.
66 + W.P.(C) 5081/2022 & CM APPL.15092/2022
PREETI AGARWAL
..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Ajay Wadhwa with Mr. Sanchil
Jha, Advocates.
versus
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 28(1)
& ANR.
..... Respondent
Through Ms. Vibhooti Malhotra, Advocate. 70 + W.P.(C) 5086/2022 & CM APPL.15109/2022
MANOJ KUMAR SAMDARIA
..... Petitioner
Through Mr. P. Roychaudhuri with Mr. Gagan
Gupta, Advocates.
versus
ACIT CIRCLE 52-1 NEW DELHI & ANR ..... Respondent
Through Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing
Counsel with Mr. Vipul Agrawal and
Mr. Parth Senwal, Jr. Standing
Counsel. 71 + W.P.(C) 5087/2022 & CM APPL.15112/2022
LALJI MAL OMKAR MAL
..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Amit Goel, Advocate.
versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER & ANR.
..... Respondents
Through Mr. Abhishek Maratha, Advocate. 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 01/07/2026 at 14:03:39
72 + W.P.(C) 5088/2022 & CM APPL.15113/2022
MADHUR KABRA
..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Ajay Wadhwa with Mr. Sanchil
Jha, Advocates.
versus
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 70(1)
& ANR.
..... Respondent
Through Advocate (appearance not given) 73 + W.P.(C) 5089/2022 & CM APPL.15116/2022, CM APPL.15117/2022
KLG SECURITIES LTD.
..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Gautam Jain with Mr. Piyush
Kumar, Advocates.
versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 14(3) DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Ajit Sharma, Advocate. 74 + W.P.(C) 5091/2022 & CM APPL.15121/2022, CM APPL.15122/2022
REHANA BABY
..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Mudit Bansal, Advocate.
versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 63 -1 DELHI ..... Respondent
Through Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing
Counsel with Mr. Vipul Agrawal and
Mr. Parth Senwal, Jr. Standing
Counsel. 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 01/07/2026 at 14:03:39
75 + W.P.(C) 5092/2022 & CM APPL.15125/2022
MERU MINERALS PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Petitioner
Through Ms. Geeta Rani, Advocate.
versus
DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through Ms. Vibhooti Malhotra, Advocate. 76 + W.P.(C) 5093/2022 & CM APPL.15126/2022, CM APPL.15127/2022
P.N CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.
..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Gautam Jain with Mr. Piyush
Kumar, Advocates.
versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 19(1) DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Puneet Rai, Advocate.
77 + W.P.(C) 5094/2022 & CM APPL.15129/2022, CM APPL.15130/2022
SANA REALTORS PVT. LTD.
..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Gautam Jain with Mr. Piyush
Kumar, Advocates.
versus
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 22(2)
DELHI & ANR.
..... Respondents
Through Mr. Puneet Rai, Advocate.
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 01/07/2026 at 14:03:39
78 + W.P.(C) 5096/2022 & CM APPL.15136/2022, CM APPL.15137/2022
KARAM SINGH
..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Mudit Bansal, Advocate.
versus
THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 10 DELHI ..... Respondent
Through Mr. Ajit Sharma, Advocate. 80 + W.P.(C) 5098/2022 & CM APPL.15141/2022, CM APPL.15142/2022
NITU JAIN
..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Shailesh Gupta with Mr. Shyam
Sundar, Advocates.
versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 58(3) NEW DELHI AND ANR ..... Respondents
Through Ms. Vibhooti Malhotra, Advocate.
81 + W.P.(C) 5099/2022 & CM APPL.15143/2022, CM APPL.15144/2022
PRIYANKA NAHATA,
..... Petitioner
Through Ms. Kanika Sinha with Ms. Maiteryi
Joshi, Advocates.
versus
ITO WARD 30 (1)DELHI & ANR.
..... Respondents
Through Mr. Ajit Sharma, Advocate.
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 01/07/2026 at 14:03:39
84 + W.P.(C) 5104/2022 & CM APPL.15153/2022, CM APPL.15154/2022
RAPID BUILDCON PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Upvan Gupta, Advocate.
versus
THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD 21 (1), DELHI ..... Respondent
Through Mr. Shailesh Gupta with Mr. Shyam
Sundar, Advocates. 86 + W.P.(C) 5109/2022 & CM APPL.15162/2022, CM APPL.15163/2022
MONESH ISRANI
..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Satyen Sethi with Mr. Arta Trana
Panda, Advocates.
versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 28(1), & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Abhishek Maratha, Advocate. 89 + W.P.(C) 5114/2022 & CM APPL.15170/2022, CM APPL.15171/2022
M/S. FAITH BUILDTECH (P) LTD
..... Petitioner
Through Mr. S. Krishnah, Advocate.
versus
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Kunal Sharma, Advocate.
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 01/07/2026 at 14:03:39
90 + W.P.(C) 5117/2022 & CM APPL.15175/2022, CM APPL.15176/2022
KIRAN JINDAL
..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Nitin Gultai, Advocate.
versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-14(1),DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Ajit Sharma, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SHARMA
28.03.2022 O R D E R
Learned counsel for the parties admit that as the impugned notices in the present matters have been issued post 31st March, 2021 without following the procedure prescribed in the substituted Sections 147 to 151 w.e.f. 01st April, 2021, the present matters are covered by the judgment dated 15th 2. The conclusion reached by this Court in Mon Mohan Kohli (supra) is reproduced hereinbelow:- December, 2021 passed by this Court in the case of Mon Mohan Kohli vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr., W.P.(C) No.6176/2021. “CONCLUSION
This Court is of the view that as the Legislature has introduced the new provisions, Sections 147 to 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by way of the Finance Act, 2021 with effect from 1st April, 2021 and as the said Section 147 is not even mentioned in the impugned Explanations, the reassessment notices relating to any Assessment Year issued 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 01/07/2026 at 14:03:39
under Section 148 after 31st
March, 2021 had to comply with the substituted Sections. 98. It is clarified that the power of reassessment that existed prior to 31st March, 2021 continued to exist till the extended period i.e. till 30th June, 2021; however, the Finance Act, 2021 has merely changed the procedure to be followed prior to issuance of notice with effect from 1st
April, 2021. 99. This Court is of the opinion that Section 3(1) of Relaxation Act empowers the Government/Executive to extend only the time limits and it does not delegate the power to legislate on provisions to be followed for initiation of reassessment proceedings. In fact, the Relaxation Act does not give power to Government to extend the erstwhile Sections 147 to 151 beyond 31st March, 2021 and/or defer the operation of substituted provisions enacted by the Finance Act, 2021. Consequently, the impugned Explanations in the Notifications dated 31st March, 2021 and 27th
April, 2021 are not conditional legislation and are beyond the power delegated to the Government as well as ultra vires the parent statute i.e. the Relaxation Act. Accordingly, this Court is respectfully not in agreement with the view of the Chhattisgarh High Court in Palak Khatuja (supra), but with the views of the Allahabad High Court and Rajasthan High Court in Ashok Kumar Agarwal (supra) and Bpip Infra Private Limited (supra) respectively. 100. The submission of the Revenue that Section 6 of the General Clauses Act saves notices issued under Section 148 post 31st
March, 2021 is untenable in law, as in the present case, the repeal is followed by a fresh legislation on the same subject and the new Act manifests an intention to destroy the old procedure. Consequently, if the Legislature has permitted reassessment to be made in a particular manner, it can only be in this manner, or not at all. 101. The argument of the respondents that the substitution made by the Finance Act, 2021 is not applicable to past 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 01/07/2026 at 14:03:39
Assessment Years, as it is substantial in nature is contradicted by Respondents’ own Circular 549 of 1989 and its own submission that from 1st
July, 2021, the substitution made by the Finance Act, 2021 will be applicable. 102. Revenue cannot rely on Covid-19 for contending that the new provisions Sections 147 to 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 should not operate during the period 1st April, 2021 to 30th
June, 2021 as Parliament was fully aware of Covid-19 Pandemic when it passed the Finance Act, 2021. Also, the arguments of the respondents qua non-obstante clause in Section 3(1) of the Relaxation Act, ‘legal fiction’ and ‘stop the clock provision’ are contrary to facts and untenable in law. 103. Consequently, this Court is of the view that the Executive/Respondents/Revenue cannot use the administrative power to issue Notifications under Section 3(1) of the Relaxation Act, 2020 to undermine the expression of Parliamentary supremacy in the form of an Act of Parliament, namely, the Finance Act, 2021. This Court is also of the opinion that the Executive/Respondents/Revenue cannot frustrate the purpose of substituted statutory provisions, like Sections 147 to 151 of Income Tax Act, 1961 in the present instance, by emptying it of content or impeding or postponing their effectual operation.”
Keeping in view the aforesaid, Explanations A(a)(ii)/A(b) to the Notifications dated 31st March, 2021 and 27th 4. Consequently, the impugned reassessment notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are quashed and the present writ petitions are allowed. If the law permits the respondents/revenue to take further steps in the matter, they shall be at liberty to do so. Needless to state April, 2021 are declared to be ultra vires the Relaxation Act, 2020 and are therefore bad in law and null and void. 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 01/07/2026 at 14:03:39
that if and when such steps are taken and if the petitioners have a grievance, they shall be at liberty to take their remedies in accordance with law.
MANMOHAN, J
DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J MARCH 28, 2022 st 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 01/07/2026 at 14:03:39
More judgments on Section 147
- 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
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Anjanarani Jena vs. The Commissioner,CGST, Cx And CustomsOrissa · 10 Nov 2026
- M/S Alok Kumar Sethi, Bhubaneswar vs. Principal Commissioner, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 10 Nov 2026
- Natuk Mra vs. The Union Of INDIA And 3 OrsGauhati · 10 Nov 2026
- Tatvam Procon Private Limited, Gujarat vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 10 Nov 2026
- Swapna Acharya vs. Superintendent, GST And Central Excise, Bhubaneswar-1Orissa · 10 Nov 2026