Approval under section 151(i) valid but reassessment notices under section 148 and orders under 148A(d) invalid beyond surviving time

HC held that the specified authority's approval under section 151(i) for issuance of reassessment notices and orders was valid, but the impugned notices under section 148 (and consequent orders under section 148A(d)) were issued beyond the "surviving time" permitted by transitional directions and therefore invalid. Applying the Supreme Court's framework on surviving time, the court quashed and set aside the reassessment notices issued after the surviving period and the related section 148A(d) orders.

---

---

ISSUES PRESENTED AND CONSIDERED

1. Whether a notice issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 after issuance of a deemed notice under the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation of Certain Provisions) Ordinance, 2020 (TOLA) between 01.04.2021 and 30.06.2021 is valid or time-barred where the Assessing Officer supplied relevant information to the assessee after 30.06.2021 and issued a fresh section 148 notice thereafter.

2. Whether proceedings and consequential orders (including order under section 148A(d), assessment under section 147 read with section 144, demand notices and penalty under section 271(1)(c) read with section 154) survive where the foundational section 148 notice is held to be time-barred.

3. How the concept of "surviving time" (the period of limitation left as on 30.06.2021 under the Act/TOLA) is to be calculated and applied to determine validity of reassessment notices issued after the TOLA period, including the effect of the two-week period allowed to assessees to reply after supply of information by the Assessing Officer.

ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS

Issue 1 - Validity of section 148 notice issued after TOLA period where information was supplied after 30.06.2021

Legal framework: Section 148 (reassessment notice) and the amendments/provisions effected by the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation of Certain Provisions) Ordinance, 2020 (TOLA) which deemed notices issued between 01.04.2021 and 30.06.2021 to have a stay; the statutory limitation periods under the Income-tax Act; and the post-TOLA regime governing issuance of reassessment notices after supply of information by the Assessing Officer and allowance of time for the assessee to reply.

Precedent treatment: The Court treats the controlling Apex Court directions concerning (a) the deemed stay of TOLA notices and (b) the requirement that reassessment notices under the new regime must be issued within the "surviving time" left as on 30.06.2021. Those high court authorities/directives are followed and applied to the facts; earlier decisions that characterized TOLA notices as to be treated under the new section 148A regime are applied as guidance for remaking validity assessments.

Interpretation and reasoning: The Court reasons that the period during which the show-cause/deemed notices were stayed runs from the date the deemed notice was issued (between 01.04.2021 and 30.06.2021) until the Assessing Officer supplies the relevant information to the assessee, plus the two-week period allowed to the assessee to respond. The reassessment notice issued under section 148 post-TOLA must therefore be issued within the remaining limitation period ("surviving time") computed as on 30.06.2021. If the reassessment notice is issued beyond that surviving time, it is time-barred. Applying those principles to the facts, the Court calculated the assessee's last permissible date for issuance of the fresh section 148 notice (taking the date of original TOLA notice, number of days remaining to 30.06.2021, date of supply of information and two-week reply period) and found the impugned notice was issued after that date.

Ratio vs. Obiter: Ratio - reassessment notices issued after the TOLA period must be issued within the "surviving time" remaining as on 30.06.2021 (measured from the original TOLA notice date to 30.06.2021), and the period of stay extends until supply of information plus the two-week reply period; notices issued beyond that surviving time are time-barred and invalid. Obiter - detailed numeric examples and the application to other assessment years are illustrative but the central principle above is the binding ratio adopted by the Court.

Conclusions: The impugned section 148 notice issued after the assessed surviving time (i.e., later than the last permissible date computed by reference to the TOLA notice date, supply of information and two-week reply period) is invalid and time-barred. The Court quashes and sets aside the notice on that basis.

Issue 2 - Consequences for subsequent orders (section 148A(d) order, assessment under section 147/144, demand and penalty) where the foundational section 148 notice is invalid

Legal framework: Principle that consequential proceedings founded upon a void or invalid foundational notice cannot survive if the initiating notice is quashed; statutory scheme for reassessment and penalties which presupposes a valid reopening notice.

Precedent treatment: The Court applies the settled approach that invalidity of the initiating notice vitiates subsequent proceedings dependent on that notice. Prior higher court directions about the temporal limits for reassessment are applied to determine invalidity, and then the usual consequence-quashing of consequential orders-is followed.

Interpretation and reasoning: Having found the section 148 notice to be time-barred for being issued after the surviving period, the Court reasons that the order passed under section 148A(d), the fresh assessment under section 147 read with section 144, demand notices and penalty order under section 271(1)(c) read with section 154 are consequent upon and dependent on that invalid notice. Therefore, none of those subsequent proceedings survive and all must be quashed.

Ratio vs. Obiter: Ratio - where a reassessment notice under section 148 is held invalid as time-barred, subsequent orders passed in consequence of that notice (including orders under section 148A(d), assessments under section 147/144, demands and penalties) are vitiated and liable to be quashed. Obiter - particulars of separate communications (e.g., show-cause to legal representatives on death of assessee) are factual and do not affect the legal consequence flowing from invalidity of the foundational notice.

Conclusions: All consequential proceedings emanating from the impugned section 148 notice are quashed and set aside as they cannot survive the invalidity of the foundational notice.

Issue 3 - Calculation and application of "surviving time" including the two-week reply period after supply of information

Legal framework: The Court relies on the statutory limitation rules as they existed on the relevant assessment years, the TOLA deemed-stay mechanism, and the remedial directions requiring supply of information and an additional two weeks for the assessee to reply before a fresh section 148 notice may be validly issued.

Precedent treatment: The Court follows the approach laid down by the higher court directions that computing surviving time requires case-specific arithmetic: note the date of issuance of the TOLA notice, compute the number of days remaining until 30.06.2021, note the date on which information was supplied, add the two-week reply period to that date, and ensure the reassessment notice is issued within the surviving time so calculated.

Interpretation and reasoning: The Court sets out a concrete method and applies it to the facts: determine (i) the date of the original deemed notice under TOLA, (ii) number of days remaining until 30.06.2021 (surviving time), (iii) date of supply of information under the post-TOLA directions, (iv) add two weeks to allow reply; then determine the last permissible date for issuance of a fresh section 148 notice. If the Assessing Officer issues the notice after that last permissible date, the notice falls outside the surviving time and is invalid.

Ratio vs. Obiter: Ratio - the described calculation method and the inclusion of the two-week reply period in determining the end of the stay/surviving time is authoritative for assessing validity. Obiter - examples and tabulated calculations in the judgment are illustrations of the application of the method to particular assessment years and fact patterns.

Conclusions: The surviving time must be calculated as of 30.06.2021 by reference to the original TOLA notice date; the stay ends upon supply of information plus two weeks; reassessment notices must be issued within the surviving time so computed. Application of that method in the present facts shows the impugned notice was issued after the permissible date and is therefore invalid.

Cross-reference: Issue 1 and Issue 3 are interdependent - the computation described in Issue 3 determines the legal conclusion in Issue 1; Issue 2 then follows as a direct legal consequence of the conclusions in Issues 1 and 3.

---