SAROJ MEHNDI vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 49.1 & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 29.04.2025 + W.P.(C) 3152/2025, CM APPL. 14850/2025, CM APPL. 14851/2025 & CM APPL. 20774/2025 SAROJ MEHNDI .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Pradeep Singh Rawat, Mr. Girish Chandra & Mr. Pankaj Pandey, Advocates. versus INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 49.1 & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Shlok Chandra, Sr. Standing Counsel with Ms. Naincy Jain, Jr. SC, Ms. Madhavi Shukla, Jr. SC & Mr. Ujjwal Jain, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA VIBHU BAKHRU, J. (Oral) 1. The Petitioner [Assessee] has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning a notice dated 11.07.2022 [the impugned notice] issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act] for the Assessment Year [AY] 2014-15. It is the Assessee’s case that the impugned notice has been issued beyond the prescribed period of limitation. 2. The initial notice under Section 148 of the Act for AY 2014-15 was Signature Not Verified W.P.(C) 3152/2025 Page 1 of 4 Signed By:NEELAM SHARMA Signing Date:05.05.2025 12:38:28 issued on 23.06.2021. This notice was unsustainable as it was issued in accordance with the statutory regime that existed prior to 31.03.2021. In the case of Mon Mohan Kohli v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr.: Neutral Citation: 2021:DHC:4181-DB, this court set aside notices issued after 31.03.2021 that did not follow the procedure prescribed under Section 148A of the Act. However, in Union of India & Others. v. Ashish Agarwal: (2023) 1 SCC 617, the Supreme Court directed that such notices be treated as notices issued under Section 148A(b) of the Act and further granted time to the Assessing Officer [AO] to supply the information and material on which such notices were premised. 3. In compl