VIVEK KEJRIWAL (HUF) vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

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.6550 OF 2022 (T-IT) BETWEEN: VIVEK KEJRIWAL [HUF] REPRESENTED BY ITS KARTA SRI. VIVEK KEJRIWAL SON OF ATMA RAM KEJRIWAL AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS NO. 221, PEBBLE RAY APARTMENT TOWER-4, 22ND FLOOR RMV 2ND STAGE, DOLLARS COLONY BANGALORE 560094.

... PETITIONER (BY MR. A. SHANKAR, SR. COUNSEL FOR MR. S. ANNAMALAI, ADV.,) AND: 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WARD-6 (3) (1), BMTC BUILDING

80 FEET ROAD, 6TH BLOCK

NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE

KORAMANGALA

BENGALURU-560095. 2. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 BENGALURU-1, BMTC BUILDING

80 FEET ROAD, 6TH BLOCK

NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE

KORAMANGALA

BENGALURU-560095.

2 3. CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES THROUGH THE SECRETARY

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

MINISTRY 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 19/04/2021 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14, BEARING DIN AND NOTICE NO. ITBA/AST/S/148/2021-22/1032510593(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 Taxes, as ultra vires the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘1961 Act’ for short)

3 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 19.04.2021 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’, Rajasthan High Court in ‘BPIP INFRA (P.) LTD. VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(1), JAIPUR, Delhi

4 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. The impugned notice dated 19.04.2021 issued under Section 148 of the Act is quashed.

5 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