Section 115BBE constitutional validity upheld as statutory provisions cannot be struck down based on apprehension of misuse

Delhi HC dismissed writ petitions challenging constitutional validity of Section 115BBE regarding reopening of assessment under Section 147. Court held that statutory provisions cannot be declared unconstitutional based on apprehension of misuse or possibility of abuse of power. Administration must be presumed to act fairly unless proven otherwise. Court emphasized that Income Tax Act provides complete machinery for assessment/reassessment, and assessees cannot bypass this to invoke HC jurisdiction under Article 226. All pending applications were dismissed.

---

---

Issues involved: Challenge to orders under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for Assessment Years 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, challenge to notices issued under Section 148 of the Act, and challenge to the constitutional validity of Section 115BBE of the Act.

Challenge to orders and notices under Section 148: The petitioner challenged the orders and notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, arguing that the notices were issued after the three-year limitation period without obtaining sanction from the appropriate authority. The Respondents contended that final assessment orders had been passed for the relevant years, and the issue of limitation should be raised before the Appellate Authorities as it involves a mixed question of fact and law.

Constitutional validity of Section 115BBE: The petitioner raised concerns about the constitutional validity of Section 115BBE of the Act, alleging that its application in the present case was unfair and violative of constitutional provisions. The petitioner argued that the section could lead to subjective exercise of discretion by Assessing Officers, resulting in differential treatment of assessees. However, the court cited established legal principles that statutory provisions should not be declared unconstitutional based on hypothetical misuse or abuse, emphasizing that the law provides safeguards against biased application.

Legal Precedents: The court referred to legal precedents to support its decision, highlighting that the mere possibility of abuse of a statutory provision does not render it invalid. It emphasized that the Act provides a comprehensive mechanism for tax assessment, and aggrieved parties should follow the prescribed procedures rather than directly approaching the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.

Conclusion: The High Court dismissed the writ petitions and pending applications while granting the petitioner the liberty to raise all contentions before the Appellate Authority in accordance with the law. The judgment underscored the importance of following the established legal procedures for tax assessment and reiterated that statutory provisions should not be invalidated based on speculative concerns of misuse.

---