M/S TUFFWUD INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court declared the explanation below Clause (A) in the relevant CBDT notifications as ultra vires the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the Taxation and Other Laws Act, 2020. Consequently, the impugned notice issued under Section 148 was quashed.
What were the facts?
The petitioner sought to quash notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and challenged certain notifications issued by the CBDT regarding extension of time limits. The petitioner argued that these notifications were ultra vires the Income Tax Act and the Taxation and Other Laws Act, 2020.
What were the issues?
Whether the CBDT notifications extending time limits for reassessment notices were ultra vires the Income Tax Act and the Taxation and Other Laws Act, 2020. Whether notices issued under the erstwhile Section 148 after April 1, 2021, were valid.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF APRIL 2022 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S. VISHWAJITH SHETTY W.P. No.6575 OF 2022 (T-IT) BETWEEN: M/S. TUFFWUD INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED REPRESENTDED BY ITS DIRECTOR RUBY CHOUDHARY D/O DEVIPRASAD JI JHUNJHUNWALA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS PRESENT ADDRESS AT NO. 108/2 VIJAYA BANK COLONY OUTER RING ROAD ODDDABANASWADI BENGALURU-560043.
... PETITIONER (BY MR. A. SHANKAR, SR. COUNSEL FOR MR. S. ANNAMALAI, ADV.,) AND: 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
CIRCLE -7(1)(1), BMTC BUILDING 80 FEET ROAD, 6TH BLOCK NEAR KHB GAMES VILALGE KORAMANGALA BENGALURU-560095. 2. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISISONER OF INCOME TAX-2 BENGALURU, BMTC BUILDING 80 FEET ROAD, 6TH BLOCK NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE
2 KORAMANGALA BENGALURU-560095. 3. CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES THROUGH THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE MINSITRY OF FINANCE NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI-110001.
... RESPONDENTS (BY MR. K.V. ARAVIND, A/W MR. DILIP .M, ADVOCATES) - - -
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE DATED 29/06/2021 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15, BEARING DIN AND NOTICE NO. ITBA/AST/S/148/2021-22/1033828306(1) HEREIN MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A1 & ETC., THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ’B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER The petitioner in this writ petition has sought quashment of explanation below Clause (A) in the notification bearing No.20/2021 F.NO.370142/35/2020-TPL dated 31.03.2021 and notification No.38/2021/F.No.370142/35/2020-TPL dated 27.04.2021 issued by Central Board of Direct
3 Taxes, as ultra vires the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘1961 Act’ for short) and the provisions of Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 (hereinafter referred to as ‘2020 Act’ for short). The petitioner has also prayed for relief that extension of time limit by the 2020 Act does not apply to notices issued under erstwhile Section 148 of the 1961 Act, after 01.04.2021. The petitioner also seeks a writ of certiorari for quashing the notices dated 29.06.2021 issued under Section 148 of the 1961 Act for the Assessment year 2016-17. 2. We have heard the learned counsel at length. For the reasons assigned by us in the judgment dated 19.04.2022 passed in W.P.No.22348/2021 and for the reasons assigned by division bench of High Court of Allahabad in ASHOK KUAR AGARWAL VS. UNION OF INDIA’,
4 Rajasthan High Court in ‘BPIP INFRA (P.) LTD. VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(1), JAIPUR, Delhi High Court decision in MON MOHAN KOHLI VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR. And decision of Bombay High Court in TATA COMMUNICATIONS TRANSFORMATION SERVICES LIMITED, VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 14(1) AND OTHERS, W.P.NO.1334/2021 the explanation below Clause (A) in the notification bearing No.20/2021370142/35/2020-tl dated 31.03.2021 and notification No.38/2021f. No.370142/35/2020- TPL dated 27.04.2021 issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes is hereby declared as ultra vires the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961 and the provisions of Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020.
5 The impugned notice dated 29.06.2021 issued under Section 148 of the Act is quashed. 3. However, it will be open to the Assessing Officer concerned to initiate fresh re-assessment proceeding in accordance with relevant provisions of the 1961 Act as amended by Finance Act, 2021 after strictly complying with the provisions of the Act. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE SS
More judgments on Section 148
- 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
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
- Adj Agri International LLP, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), RajkotITA 1198/RJT/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Sahoo Supply Agency,Balasore vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs,New DelhiOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S Jyoti Consultants, Agrahat vs. Pr. Commissioner GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, BhubaneswarOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S. Sahoo Supply Agency vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And CustomsOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- Gopal Aromatic PVT. LTD., Cuttack vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S Crs Builders Private Limited vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 2 Nov 2026