Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal Findings of Fact Cannot Be Re-Appreciated in an Appeal Under Section 10F Companies Act: Madras High Court Equality Is Not A Mechanical Formula, But A Human Commitment: P&H High Court Grants Visually Impaired Mali Retrospective Promotions With Full Benefits Orissa High Court Rules Notice for No Confidence Motion Must Include Both Requisition and Resolution – Provision Held Mandatory Ashramam Built on Private Land, Managed by Family – Not a Public Religious Institution: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Endowments Notification Cruelty Must Be Proved, Not Presumed: Gujarat High Court Acquits Deceased Husband In 498A Case After 22 Years Trade Dress Protection Goes Beyond Labels: Calcutta High Court Affirms Injunction Over Coconut Oil Packaging Mimicry Mere Filing of Income Tax Returns Does Not Exonerate the Accused: Madras High Court Refuses Discharge to Wife of Public Servant in ₹2 Crore DA Case

No Notice Under Section 148 if Three Years Have Elapsed: High Court Quashes Reassessment Notices Beyond Three-Year Limitation for AYs 2016-17 and 2017-18

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Lakehika


In a landmark judgment, the Delhi High Court has set aside reassessment notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment years (AYs) 2016-17 and 2017-18, citing the expiration of the prescribed three-year limitation period. This decision, pronounced by the Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Girish Kathpalia, marks a significant moment in the interpretation of the Finance Act, 2021, regarding reassessment procedures.

The court observed, “No notice under section 148 shall be issued for the relevant assessment year if three years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year,” highlighting the stringent adherence to the limitation period as mandated by the amended provisions of the Income Tax Act. This statement, encapsulating the crux of the judgment, serves as a crucial guideline for the issuance of reassessment notices.

This ruling came in response to a series of writ petitions challenging the validity of reassessment notices that were issued post the enactment of the Finance Act, 2021. The petitioners contended that these notices were beyond the permissible time frame, making a compelling case against the extended reassessment notices.

The High Court, in its detailed analysis, declared the ‘travel back in time’ theory, as propounded in the CBDT Instruction dated 11.05.2022, to be invalid in law. This theory suggested that extended reassessment notices could retroactively apply to their original issuance date, a concept the Court firmly rejected.

Further elaborating on the legislative intent behind the Finance Act, 2021, the Court underscored the reduction of the time limit for issuing notices under Section 148, aiming to provide ease of doing business and reduce litigation. The judgment emphasized that in cases where the escaped income is less than Rs. 50 lakhs, the limitation period for issuing a notice under Section 148 is strictly three years from the end of the relevant assessment year.

This decision is a significant stride towards reinforcing the legal framework governing reassessment notices, offering clarity and predictability to taxpayers. The ruling also underscores the judiciary’s role in interpreting legislative changes critically and ensuring that administrative actions align with the legislative intent.

The judgment has been welcomed by the legal community, with several advocates representing the petitioners appreciating the Court’s thorough examination of the legal nuances involved in the case. The Revenue authorities are expected to review their procedures in light of this ruling to ensure compliance with the statutory limitation periods.

Date of Decision: 10 November  2023

GANESH DASS KHANNA VS INCOME TAX OFFICER AND ANR

Latest Legal News