What did the High Court hold?

The High Court acknowledged the appellant's submission regarding the Section 143(2) notice and the Revenue's stance. The court decided to seek further instructions from the Department on whether the notice was issued.

The appellant challenged an ITAT order which remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer. The appellant argued that the remand was improper without a prior determination on the issuance of a Section 143(2) notice. The Revenue contended that such a notice is not mandatory for reassessment.

What were the issues?

Whether the ITAT could remand the matter without determining the issue of Section 143(2) notice issuance. Whether a Section 143(2) notice is mandatory for reassessment proceedings.

Akasaki Technology (P) Ltd vs PCIT | Delhi High Court 2025

$~69 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 241/2025

AKASAKI TECHNOLOGY (P) LTD .....Appellant Through: Mr S Krishnan and Mr Harshit Chauhan, Advocates.

versus

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX .....Respondent Through: Mr Vipul Agrawal, SCC, Ms Sakshi Shairwal, Mr Akshat Singh, JSCs, Mr Gauraang Ranjan and Ms Harshita, Advocate.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

O R D E R %

24.07.2025 CM APPL. 44376/2025(Exemption) 1. Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 2. The application stands disposed of. ITA 241/2025 3. The challenge in this appeal under Section 260A the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) is to an order dated 05.05.2025 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench, New Delhi (ITAT) in ITA No.6076/Del/2024 in respect of the Assessment Year 2012-13. 4. The submission of Mr Krishnan, learned counsel appearing for the appellant is that the ITAT could not have remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer without a determination on the issue that notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was not issued. 5. Mr Aggarwal, learned counsel appearing for the Revenue states he 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 27/03/2026 at 11:49:46

shall take instructions from the Department, as to whether notice was issued to the appellant/assessee under Section 143(2) of the Act. Though, at this stage, Mr Aggarwal submits that it is not mandatory to issue notice under Section 143(2) of the Act for reassessment. 6. At his request, renotify on 27.08.2025.

-V. KAMESWAR RAO, J

VINOD KUMAR, J JULY 24, 2025 M

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 27/03/2026 at 11:49:46

AKASAKI TECHNOLOGY (P) LTD vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

What did the High Court hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments