Income Tax: Delhi HC Remands Back Reopening of Case to Re-examine Time Limitation

Filatex India Ltd challenged the reassessment proceedings initiated for AY 2014-15 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act. The original notice dated 08.06.2021 was issued under the old regime, later treated as a Section 148A(b) notice after the Supreme Court’s decision in Ashish Agarwal. The petitioner argued that the subsequent notice dated 30.07.2022, issued under Section 148 after an order under Section 148A(d), was barred by limitation under the framework clarified in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal.

A detailed limitation chart was placed on record showing that for AY 2014-15, the permissible time, considering the six-year limit under old Section 149, the TOLA extensions, the “deemed stay” period, and the surviving days, expired on 28/29 June 2022. Since the fresh notice was issued only on 30 July 2022, the petitioner contended that the notice was time-barred. The Revenue did not seriously dispute the limitation computation.

Main Issue: Whether the reassessment notice issued on 30 July 2022 for AY 2014-15 survived limitation under Sections 147–149 as interpreted in Rajeev Bansal, and whether the matter should be remanded for the AO to determine the surviving period.

HC’s Rulling: The Delhi High Court set aside the impugned Section 148 notice and remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer. The AO must re-examine the question of surviving limitation by considering the petitioner’s limitation chart and the binding decisions of the Supreme Court and this Court, including Rajeev Bansal, Ram Balram, T.K.S. Builders, Abhinav Jindal, and Naveen Kumar Gupta.

The AO has been directed to grant a hearing to the petitioner’s representative and issue a detailed, reasoned order within eight weeks. All further proceedings will abide by this determination. The writ petition and pending applications were disposed of.

To Read Full Judgment, Download PDF Given Below