BYNDOOR VYAVASAYA SEVA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER
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 2020 Act. Consequently, the impugned re-assessment notice dated 16.04.2021 was quashed.
What were the facts?
The petitioner sought to quash re-assessment notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner also challenged notifications issued by the CBDT extending time limits under the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020.
What were the issues?
Whether the CBDT notifications extending time limits were ultra vires the Income Tax Act and the 2020 Act, and if the extension applied to notices issued under the erstwhile Section 148 after April 1, 2021.
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 18TH DAY OF APRIL 2022 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S. VISHWAJITH SHETTY W.P. No.21412 OF 2021 (T-IT) BETWEEN: BYNDOOR VYAVASAYA SEVA SAHAKARI SANGHA LTD., YEDTHARE, BYNDOOR BYNDOOR TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT-576 214 REP BY ITS C.E.O. MR. CHANDRA MOGER.
... PETITIONER (BY MR. MAHESH R. UPPIN, ADV.,) AND: 1. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2, AAYAKAR BHAVAN ADI-UDUPI, MALPE ROAD AMBALPADY POST UDUPI-576 103. 2. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 AND TPS, AAYAKAR BHAVAN ADI-UDUPI, MALPE ROAD AMBALPADY POST UDUPI-576103. 3. CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES BY ITS SECRETARY NORTH BLOCK
2 SECRETARIAT BUILDING NEW DELHI-110002.
... RESPONDENTS (BY MR. K.V. ARAVIND A/W MR. DILIP M, ADVS., FOR R1-R3) - - - THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE RE- ASSESSMENT NOTICE DATED 16.04.2021 BEARING DIN NO.ITBA/AST/S/148/2021-22/1032455980(1) ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT MARKED AS ANNEXURE-B BY ISSUING A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARY. QUASH THE NOTICE DATED 18.08.2021 BEARING DIN NO.ITBA/AST/S/142(1)/2021- 22/10345954661(1) ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT MARKED AS ANENXURE-C BY ISSUING A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARY & 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,
3 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 16.04.2021 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.
4 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.20/2021 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 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 16.04.2021 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
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
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Sikka Motors PVT LTD vs. Union Of INDIA & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Shri Yaras Suresh Babu Prabhu Kumar vs. The Union Of INDIATelangana · 27 Oct 2026
- Santa Singh vs. SuperintendentUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Azaad Builders vs. Assistant Commissioner SGSTUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Shadab Malik vs. State Of U.P. And 2 OthersAllahabad · 26 Oct 2026