AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (1) TMI 159
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 4. A notice dated 31.03.2021 was issued to the petitioner under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (In short IT Act, 1961) for the Assessment Year 2014-2015, as it stood prior to the substitution/repeal with its new set of provisions with effect from 01.04.2021. The said notice was issued to the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner had not declared income from the sale of the said property in the return filed on 24.04.2021 for the Assessment Year 2014-2015. 5. The said notice was digitally signed at 8.16 p.m by the concerned Officer before uploading the same in the Web Portal on 31.03.2021. The notice was thereafter delivered to the petitioner by e-mail on the following day on 01.04.2021 at about 7.12.04 a.m. Thus, the said notice was communicated to the petitioner on 01.04.2021. The hard copy of the said notice dated 31.03.2021 was also separately dispatched through post on 07.04.2021 and was later received by the petitioner. 6. The petitioner therefore filed a Return of Income on 24.04.2021, pursuant to the aforesaid notice and participated in the proceedings. Mean while, the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered its decision on 04.05.2022 in a batch of cases ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s which may be available to the assessee under section 149 and/or which may be available under the Finance Act, 2021 and in law and whatever rights are available to the Assessing Officer under the Finance Act, 2021 are kept open and/or shall continue to be available and; (v) The present order shall substitute/modify respective judgments and orders passed by the respective High Courts quashing the similar notices issued under unamended Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 irrespective of whether they have been assailed before this Court or not." 10. This view has been followed by a Division Bench of this Court in a Smt.Parveen Amin Bhathara Vs. Income-Tax Officer, [2022] 143 taxmann.com 353 (Madras). 11. It is the specific case of the petitioner that the impugned notice dated 31.03.2021 was digitally signed at 8.16 p.m. and was dispatched through e-mail and was received by the respondents only on the following day and therefore, beyond the prescribed period of limitation under Section 149 of the IT Act, 1961 as it stood till 31.03.2021. 12. It is submitted that the fact that the notice was physically delivered after on 07.04.2021 also makes it clear that the imp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....was received as early as on 30.11.2018 from the Income Tax Officer, Chennai. 19. It is submitted that therefore submitted that the impugned notice dated 31.03.2021 issued after more than two years since then was clearly an afterthought. It is therefore submitted that it can be logically concluded that the second respondent had this information with him long back and was satisfied that no income escaped assessment. The undated sanction by the higher officials which is annexed along with the communication dated 27.01.2022 goes to prove that the sanction had been granted after issuance of the impugned notice thus was violative of Section 151 of the IT Act, 1961. 20. It is further submitted that the impugned notice had been digitally signed by one Mr. Debashish Roy, Circle 67(1), Delhi ,while the undated form for recording reasons and obtaining sanction had been signed manually by one Mr.Trilok Singh, Ward 67(1), Delhi, who is a different officer. 21. The learned counsel for the petitioner would placed reliance on the decision of the Division Bench of Delhi High Court in Suman Jeet Agarwal Vs. Income-Tax Officer, [2022] 143 taxmann.com 11 (Delhi). A specific reference is made ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in W.P. No. 27997 of 2021 by its order dated 29.03.2022 in Malavika Enterprises Vs. Central Board of Direct Taxes, [2022] 137 taxmann.com 398 (Madras). 27. By way of rejoinder, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Malavika Enterprises case (referred to supra) is prior to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ashish Agarwal's case (referred to supra). 28. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents. 29. The facts are not in dispute. Limitations for issuance of notice under Section 148 of the IT Act, 1961, was to be governed by Section 149 of the IT Act, 1961 as it stood till 31.03.2021. Section 149 of the IT Act, 1961 as it stood prior to its amendment reads as under:- Section 149.(1).No notice under Section 148 shall be issued for the relevant assessment year,- a) if four years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless the case falls under clause (b) or clause (c); b) if four years, but not more than six years, have elapsed from the end of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rom 01.04.2021. The impugned notice was delivered for despatch in the system for delivery to the petitioner. 34. The impugned notice was delivered to the petitioner on the following date at 7.12.04 a.m, the day on which old provisions stood substituted with new provisions. The hard copy of the same notice was also despatched to the petitioner on 07.04.2021 and was also received by the petitioner on the following day. 35. In Union of India and Others vs. Ashish Agarwal, 2023 1 SCC 617; 2022 SCC Online SC 543, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under:- "22. Thus, the new provisions substituted by the Finance Act, 2021 being remedial and benevolent in nature and substituted with a specific aim and object to protect the rights and interest of the assessee as well as and the same being in public interest, the respective High Courts have rightly held that the benefit of new provisions shall be made available even in respect of the proceedings relating to past assessment years, provided Section 148 notice has been issued on or after 1-4-2021. We are in complete agreement with the view taken by the various High Courts in holding so. 23. However, at the same time, the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f Section 148-A(b). The respective assessing officers shall within thirty days from today provide to the assessees the information and material relied upon by the Revenue so that the assessees can reply to the notices within two weeks thereafter; ii. The requirement of conducting any enquiry with the prior approval of the specified authority under Section 148-A(a) be dispensed with as a one-time measure vis-à-vis those notices which have been issued under Section 148 of the unamended Act from 1-4-2021 till date, including those which have been quashed by the High Courts; iii. The assessing officers shall thereafter pass an order in terms of Section 148-A(d) after following the due procedure as required under Section 148-A(b) in respect of each of the Assessees-concerned; iv. All the defences which may be available to the assessee under Section 149 and/or which may be available under the Finance Act, 2021 and in law and whatever rights are available to the Assessing Officer under the Finance Act, 2021 are kept open and/or shall continue to be available. v. The present order shall substitute/modify respective judgments and orders passed by t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... this Court in a batch of writ petitions by a common order dated 04.02.2022 in the case of Vellore Institute of Technology vs. Central Board of Direct Taxes and another rendered in W.P. No. 15019 of 2021 and etc., setting aside the reassessment notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on or after 01.04.2021 are not relevant as admittedly the notice was issued by the petitioner within the time stipulated in Section 149 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as it stood till 31.03.2021. 43. The above decision applies to cases where notices were issued on or after the first April of 2021. These notices were issued under the Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation of Certain Provisions) Ordinance Act, 2020 due to the Outbreak of COVID-19 Pandemic. That apart, changes brought to the IT Act, 1961 by Finance Act, 2021 with effect from 01.04.2021 are substantive in nature and therefore cannot apply to proceedings that were validly initiated prior to coming into force of amendment, as admittedly the notice was digitally signed on 31.03.2021 and put in the system before the limitation expired. 44. A reference may be made to Section 3 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. Section 3 of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....py thereof, to the person therein named:- (a) by post or by such courier services as may be approved by the Board; or (b) in such manner as provided under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) for the purposes of service of summons; or (c) in the form of any electronic record as provided in Chapter IV of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (21 of 2000); or (d) by any other means of transmission of documents as provided by rules made by the Board in this behalf. 47. As per Sub-section (2) to Section 282 of the IT Act, 1961, the Board may make rules providing for the addresses (including the address for electronic mail or electronic mail message) to which the communication referred to in sub-section (1) may be delivered or transmitted to the person therein named. 48. As per Rule 127A(1)(a)(i) of the IT Rules, 1962, every notice or other document communicated in electronic form by an authority under the Act shall be deemed to be authenticated in case of electronic mail or electronic mail message (e-mail), if the name and office of such income tax authority is printed on the e-mail body, if the notice or other document is in the e-mail....