TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (1) TMI 972
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., 3, 4 and 5. 2. The present writ petition has been filed challenging the notice dated 15.03.2022 issued under Section 148A (b) of the Income Tax Act 1961, for short ('the Act of 1961'); the order dated 31.03.2022 passed under Section 148A (d) of the Act of 1961, as well as all consequential actions in pursuance to the order dated 31.03.2022. 3. From the materials on record, it appears that on 15.03.2022, a notice was issued under section 148A (b) of the Act of 1961, asking the petitioner to show cause as to why a notice under Section 148 of the Act of 1961 should not be issued in view of the details contained in Annexure A to the said notice dated 15.03.2022. It is pertinent to mention that the said notice was issued in connection to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssment amounting to Rs. 78,59,057/- (Rupees Seventy Eight Lakh Fifty Nine Thousand Fifty Seven) for the Assessment year 2015-16, the Assessing Officer i.e. the respondent No.3 was of the opinion that it was a fit case for issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act of 1961. 7. It is the further case of the petitioner that the petitioner received the details from the banks only on 06.04.2022 and 25.04.2022 and thereupon submitted a reply on 20.05.2022. However, the said was not taken into consideration and the Respondent Authorities proceeded with the reassessment proceedings and as such the petitioner is before this Court. 8. Upon filing of the writ petition, it appears from the records that this Court by an order dated 30.01.2023....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d of limitation in terms with Section 149 (1) (a) of the Act of 1961 would have been 3 (three) years that is ending on 31.03.2019. The learned counsel therefore submitted that the issuance of the notice under Section 148A (b) on 15.03.2022, was therefore, barred by limitation. The learned counsel further submitted that even assuming for argument's sake but without admitting that the amount which had escaped assessment as mentioned in the order dated 31.03.2022 was Rs. 78,59,057/- (Rupees Seventy Eight Lakh Fifty Nine Thousand Fifty Seven) then Section 149 (1) (b) of the Act of 1961 would have been applicable whereby the period of limitation would be till 31.03.2026. The learned counsel therefore submitted that this is a case of complete....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....16. In terms of Section 149 (1) (a) of the Act of 1961, post the amendment w.e.f. 01.04.2021, the period within which the notice under section 148 of the Act of 1961 is required to be issued is 3(three) years. However, in terms with Clause (b) of Section 149 (1), if the amount which has escaped assessment amounts to or likely to amount to Rs. 50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakhs) or more for that year, the period is not more than 10 years. Therefore, for the assessment year 2015-16, as per Section 149 (1) (a) of the Act of 1961, the ends on 31.03.2019. However, if Section 149 (1) (a) of the Act of 1961 is applicable then the period is not beyond 31.03.2016. 15. It is further seen that as per the order passed under Section 148 A (d) the respon....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he petitioner was given only 6(six) days from the receipt of the notice which in the opinion of this Court cannot be said to be reasonable opportunity in the facts of the case. Under such circumstances, the petitioner ought to have been given some reasonable opportunity else the legislative intent behind the insertion of Section 148A to the Act of 1961 by the amendment made w.e.f. 01.04.2021 would become redundant. It is pertinent herein to observe that when a statute prescribes the requirement of a notice, the opportunity therefore to be granted to show cause has to be a reasonable opportunity. Merely because the Departmental Officer woke up late and by that time, the period was almost coming to an end, would not be a justification to depr....