ROSE ADVERTISING PVT LTD vs. ITO, WARD 21(1), DELHI & ANR.

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/5231/2022HC DelhiDLHC01012395202230 March 2022Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SHARMA15 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court held that the 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 found that the Legislature introduced new provisions (Sections 147 to 151) via the Finance Act, 2021, effective April 1, 2021. The Court agreed with the conclusion in Mon Mohan Kohli (supra) that notices issued under Section 148 after March 31, 2021, had to comply with the substituted Sections. The Court clarified that while the pre-existing reassessment power existed until June 30, 2021, the Finance Act, 2021, changed the procedure prior to notice issuance from April 1, 2021. The Court ruled that Section 3(1) of the Relaxation Act empowers extension of time limits only and not the power to legislate on reassessment procedures. Consequently, Explanations A(a)(ii)/A(b) to the Notifications dated March 31, 2021, and April 27, 2021, were declared ultra vires the Relaxation Act, 2020, and thus void. The 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 Hema, Rose Advertising Pvt Ltd, Nutan Gehlot, and others, filed writ petitions challenging reassessment notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. These notices were issued post-March 31, 2021, without adhering to the procedure prescribed in the substituted Sections 147 to 151, which became effective from April 1, 2021. The revenue contended that certain explanations in notifications issued under the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020, allowed for the continued application of the old procedure. The core of the dispute revolved around the validity of these notices and the applicability of the new reassessment provisions.

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, turning on Sections 147-151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and Section 3(1) of the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020). Assessee's contentions: The petitioners argued that since the impugned notices were issued after April 1, 2021, they must comply with the newly substituted Sections 147 to 151. They relied on the judgment in Mon Mohan Kohli vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. to support their claim that the procedure prescribed by the Finance Act, 2021, must be followed. Revenue's contentions: The revenue contended that the power of reassessment existed until June 30, 2021, and that Section 6 of the General Clauses Act saved notices issued under Section 148 post-March 31, 2021. They also argued that the substitution made by the Finance Act, 2021, was substantial and not applicable to past assessment years, and that the COVID-19 pandemic justified the continued operation of old provisions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 151

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (3 matters)

W.P.(C) 5208/2022
W.P.(C) 5231/2022
W.P.(C) 5236/2022

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

$~2, 27, 30, 32, 33, 35, 40 to 46, 51 to 54, 56, 60 to 64, 66 to 68, 72, 75, 77, 78, 83 to 85 and 88

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 2 + W.P.(C) 5208/2022 & CM APPL.15455/2022, CM APPL.15456/2022

HEMA

..... Petitioner

Through Mr. Amol Sinha with Mr. Ashvini

Kumar, Mr. Rahul Kochar and

Mr. Abhinav Arya, Advocates.

versus

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 36(1), DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondent

Through Mr. Kunal Sharma, Advocate. 27 + W.P.(C) 5231/2022 & CM APPL.15639/2022

ROSE ADVERTISING PVT LTD

..... Petitioner

Through Mr. Venketesh Chaurasia with

Ms. Rano Jain, Advocates.

versus

ITO, WARD 21(1), DELHI & ANR.

..... Respondents with Ms. Adeeba Mujahid, Jr.

Standing Counsel and Mr. Karan

Pandey, Advocate. 30 + W.P.(C) 5236/2022 & CM APPL.15652/2022

NUTAN GEHLOT

..... Petitioner 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 17/06/2026 at 01:59:28

Through Mr. P. Roychaudhuri, Advocate.

versus

ITO WARD 29 -1, DELHI & ANR.

..... Respondents

Through Ms. Vibhooti Malhotra, Advocate.

32 + W.P.(C) 5240/2022 & CM APPL.15658/2022, CM APPL.15659/2022

MR. ATUL KUMAR SHARMA

..... Petitioner

Through Mr. S. Krishnan, Advocate.

versus

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -

46(1), DELHI AND ORS.

..... Respondents

Through Mr. Abhishek Maratha, Advocate. 33 + W.P.(C) 5241/2022 & CM APPL.15663/2022, CM APPL.15664/2022

MR. KAMAL AGGARWAL

..... Petitioner

Through Mr. S. Krishnan, Advocate.

versus

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -

43(1), DELHI AND ORS.

..... Respondents with Ms. Adeeba Mujahid, Jr.

Standing Counsel and Mr. Karan

Pandey, Advocate.

35 + W.P.(C) 5244/2022 & CM APPL.15668/2022, CM APPL.15669/2022

SH RAM DHARI GUPTA

..... Petitioner

Through Mr. Himanshu Sinha with 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 17/06/2026 at 01:59:28

Mr. Bhuwan Dhoopar and Mr. Yash

Varmani, Advocates.

versus

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 29.1 DELHI ..... Respondent

Through Mr. Ajit Sharma with Mr. L.S. Hasan,

Advocates. 40 + W.P.(C) 5251/2022 & CM APPL.15683/2022, CM APPL.15684/2022

SURYA VIKAS PLYWOOD LIMITED.

..... Petitioner

Through Mr. Anmol Jagga, Advocate.

versus

ACIT, CIRCLE 22(2) & ANR.

..... Respondents with Ms. Adeeba Mujahid, Jr.

Standing Counsel and Mr. Karan

Pandey, Advocate.

Mr. Ankur Yadav, Advocate for

respondent No.2. 41 + W.P.(C) 5252/2022 & CM APPL.15685/2022, CM APPL.15686/2022

GUGAN PRASHAD SINGHAL

..... Petitioner

Through Mr. Amol Sinha with Mr. Ashvini

Kumar, Mr. Rahul Kochar and

Mr. Abhinav Arya, Advocates.

versus

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 43(1),

DELHI & ANR.

..... Respondents

Through Mr. Sunil Kumar Agarwal with

Mr. Tushar Gupta and Mr. Samarth 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 17/06/2026 at 01:59:28

Chaudhari, Advocates. 42 + W.P.(C) 5253/2022 & CM APPL.15691/2022, CM APPL.15692/2022

WAW DIGITRADE PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Petitioner

Through Mr. Amol Sinha with Mr. Ashvini

Kumar, Mr. Rahul Kochar and

Mr. Abhinav Arya, Advocates.

versus

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 27(1), DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents

Through Mr. Sunil Kumar Agarwal with

Mr. Tushar Gupta and Mr. Samarth

Chaudhari, Advocates.

43 + W.P.(C) 5255/2022 & CM APPL.15697/2022, CM APPL.15698/2022

SIDDHIDATA RETAIL MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Petitioner

Through Mr. Amol Sinha with Mr. Ashvini

Kumar, Mr. Rahul Kochar and

Mr. Abhinav Arya, Advocates.

versus

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 23(3), DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents with Ms. Adeeba Mujahid, Jr.

Standing Counsel and Mr. Karan

Pandey, Advocate. 44 + W.P.(C) 5257/2022 & CM APPL.15700/2022, CM APPL.15701/2022 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 17/06/2026 at 01:59:28

AVON CRANES PVT. LTD. (FORMERLY AVON CRANES PVT.

LTD. CONVERTED INTO LLP W.E.F 20-08-2019) ..... Petitioner

Through Mr. Piyush Kumar Kamal, Advocate.

versus

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3(1) DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents

Through Mr. Sanjay Kumar with Ms. Easha

Kadiyan, Advocates. 45 + W.P.(C) 5258/2022 & CM APPL.15705/2022, CM APPL.15706/2022

PRIME IT SOLUTIONS (P) LTD.

..... Petitioner

Through Mr. Piyush Kumar Kamal, Advocate.

versus

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 19(1) DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents with Ms. Adeeba Mujahid, Jr.

Standing Counsel and Mr. Karan

Pandey, Advocate. 46 + W.P.(C) 5259/2022 & CM APPL.15709/2022, CM APPL.15710/2022

JOGINDER SINGH GEHLOT

..... Petitioner

Through Mr. Piyush Kumar Kamal, Advocate.

versus

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL

CIRCLE 26, DELHI & ANR.

..... Respondents

Through Mr. Ajit Sharma with Mr. L.S. Hasan,

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 17/06/2026 at 01:59:28

51 + W.P.(C) 5267/2022 & CM APPL.15730/2022, CM APPL.15834/2022

RISHI BHUCHAR

..... Petitioner

Through Mr. Samyak Jain with Ms. Aastha

Gupta, Advocates.

versus

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 30(1) NEW DELHI AND ANR. ..... Respondents

Through Mr. Ajit Sharma with Mr. L.S. Hasan,

Advocates. 52 + W.P.(C) 5268/2022 & CM APPL.15734/2022, CM APPL.15735/2022

KBSP ALLOYS PRIVATE LIMITED

..... Petitioner

Through Mr. Deepanshu Jain, Advocate.

versus

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 14(3) & ANR. ..... Respondents

Through Mr. Abhishek Maratha, Advocate. 53 + W.P.(C) 5269/2022 & CM APPL.15736/2022, CM APPL.15737/2022

ALANKAR APARTMENT PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Petitioner

Through Mr. Naveen Kumar with Mr. N.P.

versus

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR. ..... Respondents

Through Mr. Sanjay Kumar with Ms. Easha

Kadiyan, 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 17/06/2026 at 01:59:28

54 + W.P.(C) 5271/2022 & CM APPL.15739/2022, CM APPL.15740/2022

RISHI BHUCHAR

..... Petitioner

Through Mr. Samyak Jain with Ms. Aastha

Gupta, Advocates.

versus

ITO WARD 30(1) & ANR.

..... Respondents

Through Mr. Ajit Sharma with Mr. L.S. Hasan,

Advocates. 56 + W.P.(C) 5275/2022 & CM APPL.15745/2022

DAYANAND SINGH

..... Petitioner

Through Mr. P. Roychaudhuri, Advocate.

versus

ITO, WARD 29 (1), DELHI & ANR.

..... Respondents

Through Mr. Ajit Sharma with Mr. L.S. Hasan,

Advocates. 60 + W.P.(C) 5282/2022 & CM APPL.15758/2022, CM APPL.15759/2022

RADHIKA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PVT. LTD...... Petitioner

Through Ms. Sudeepta Kumar Pal, Advocate.

versus

UNION OF INDIA & ANR.

..... Respondents

Through Ms. Anju Gupta with Mr. Roshan Lal

Goel, Advocates for respondent No.1.

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 17/06/2026 at 01:59:28

61 + W.P.(C) 5284/2022 & CM APPL.15762/2022, CM APPL.15763/2022

ALANKAR APARTMENT PVT. LTD. (A.Y. 2015-16)..... Petitioner

Through Mr. Naveen Kumar with Mr. N.P.

versus

ACIT, CIRCLE 1(1), DELHI & ANR.

..... Respondents

Through Mr. Sanjay Kumar with Ms. Easha

Kadiyan, Advocates. 62 + W.P.(C) 5285/2022 & CM APPL.15764/2022, CM APPL.15867/2022

MANOJ KUMAR

..... Petitioner

Through Mr. Amol Sinha with Mr. Ashvini

Kumar, Mr. Rahul Kochar and

Mr. Abhinav Arya, Advocates.

versus

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 36(1), DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents

Through Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing

Counsel with Mr. Vipul Agrawal and

Mr. Parth Semwal, Advocates. 63 + W.P.(C) 5287/2022 & CM APPL.15767/2022, CM APPL.15768/2022

GRG ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED

..... Petitioner

Through Mr. Himanshu Sinha with

Mr. Bhuwan Dhoopar and Mr. Yash

Varmani, Advocates.

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 17/06/2026 at 01:59:28

INCOME TAX OFFICER 10.3

..... Respondent

Through Mr. Ajit Sharma, Advocate. 64 + W.P.(C) 5288/2022 & CM APPL.15769/2022

DAYANAND SINGH

..... Petitioner

Through Mr. P. Roychaudhuri, Advocate.

versus

ITO WARD- 29(1) DELHI AND ANR.

..... Respondents

Through Mr. Ajit Sharma with Mr. L.S. Hasan,

Advocates.

66 + W.P.(C) 5290/2022 & CM APPL.15777/2022, CM APPL.15778/2022

AMBIENCE FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Petitioner

Through Mr. Naveen Kumar with Mr. N.P.

versus

DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1), DELHI & ANR.

..... Respondents

Through Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing

Counsel with Mr. Vipul Agrawal and

Mr. Parth Semwal, Advocates. 67 + W.P.(C) 5291/2022 & CM APPL.15781/2022

DAYANAND SINGH

..... Petitioner

Through Mr. P. Roychaudhuri, Advocate.

versus

ITO WARD 29 1, DELHI & ANR.

..... Respondents 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 17/06/2026 at 01:59:28

Through Mr. Ajit Sharma with Mr. L.S. Hasan,

Advocates.

68 + W.P.(C) 5293/2022 & CM APPL.15785/2022, CM APPL.15786/2022

ALANKAR APARTMENT PRIVATE LIMITED (AY 2016-17) ..... Petitioner

Through Mr. Naveen Kumar with Mr. N.P.

versus

DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1), DELHI & ANR.

..... Respondents

Through Mr. Sanjay Kumar with Ms. Easha

Kadiyan, Advocates. 72 + W.P.(C) 5298/2022 & CM APPL.15802/2022, CM APPL.15954/2022

EMERGING CAPITAL ADVISORS LIMITED ..... Petitioner

Through Ms. Mitika Choudhary, Advocate.

versus

OFFICE OF INCOME TAX OFFICER 8 1 & ORS. ..... Respondents

Through Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing

Counsel with Mr. Vipul Agrawal and

Mr. Parth Semwal, Advocates.

Mr. J.K. Tripathi, Advocate for

respondent No.2. 75 + W.P.(C) 5301/2022 & CM APPL.15807/2022

BHUPESH KUMAR JINDAL

..... Petitioner

Through Mr. Mani Bhadra Jain with

Mr. Abhyuday Sharma, Advocates.

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 17/06/2026 at 01:59:28

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-58(1), & ANR. ..... Respondents

Through Mr. Ajit Sharma, Advocate. 77

+ W.P.(C) 5303/2022 & CM APPL.15810/2022, CM APPL.15811/2022

ECOSENSE SUSTAINABLE SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD...... Petitioner

Through Ms. Shikha Sapra with Mr. Abhinav

Jain, Advocates.

versus

UNION OF INDIA & ANR.

..... Respondents

Through Mr. Kunal Sharma, Advocate. 78 + W.P.(C) 5304/2022 & CM APPL.15812/2022

MUKUL GEHLOT

..... Petitioner

Through Mr. P. Roychaudhuri, Advocate.

versus

ITO WARD 29-1, DELHI & ANR.

..... Respondents

Through Mr. Abhishek Maratha, Advocate.

83 + W.P.(C) 5309/2022 & CM APPL.15823/2022, CM APPL.15824/2022

GMS AUTOMOBILES P. LTD.

..... Petitioner

Through Mr. Himanshu Sinha with

Mr. Bhuwan Dhoopar and Mr. Yash

Varmani, Advocates.

versus

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 10(3), DELHI ..... Respondent

Through Mr. Ajit Sharma with Mr. L.S. Hasan, 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 17/06/2026 at 01:59:28

Advocates. 84 + W.P.(C) 5310/2022 & CM APPL.15857/2022

PALMTREE INFRACON PVT LTD

..... Petitioner

Through Mr. P. Roychaudhuri, Advocate.

versus

ACIT CIRCLE 19 1 DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents

Through Mr. Sunil Kumar Agarwal with

Mr. Tushar Gupta and Mr. Samarth

Chaudhari, Advocates.

85 + W.P.(C) 5311/2022 & CM APPL.15853/2022, CM APPL.15854/2022

VIJAY SURI

..... Petitioner

Through Mr. Ruchesh Sinha, Advocate.

versus

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 67(1), NEW

DELHI & ANR.

..... Respondents with Ms. Adeeba Mujahid, Jr.

Standing Counsel and Mr. Karan

Pandey, Advocate. 88 + W.P.(C) 5314/2022 & CM APPL.15848/2022, CM APPL.15849/2022

RAVI AGRAWAL

..... Petitioner

Through Mr. Amol Sinha with Mr. Ashvini

Kumar, Mr. Rahul Kochar and

Mr. Abhinav Arya, Advocates.

versus

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 43(6) DELHI & ANR. 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 17/06/2026 at 01:59:28

..... Respondents

Through Mr. Sunil Kumar Agarwal with

Mr. Tushar Gupta and Mr. Samarth

Chaudhari, Advocates.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SHARMA

30.03.2022 O R D E R

1.

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 97. 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 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 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 17/06/2026 at 01:59:28

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 100. The submission of the Revenue that Section 6 of the General Clauses Act saves notices issued under Section 148 post 31 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. st 101. The argument of the respondents that the substitution made by the Finance Act, 2021 is not applicable to past Assessment Years, as it is substantial in nature is contradicted by Respondents’ own Circular 549 of 1989 and its own submission that from 1 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. st 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 1 July, 2021, the substitution made by the Finance Act, 2021 will be applicable. st April, 2021 to 30th June, 2021 as Parliament was fully aware of Covid-19 Pandemic when it passed the Finance Act, 2021. Also, the 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 17/06/2026 at 01:59:28

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.”

3.

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 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. April, 2021 are declared to be ultra vires the Relaxation Act, 2020 and are therefore bad in law and null and void.

MANMOHAN, J

DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J MARCH 30, 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 17/06/2026 at 01:59:28

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →