ABHINAV JINDAL vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 52 1

Judgment text excerpt

$~35 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 15.01.2025 + W.P.(C) 7405/2024 & CM APPL. 30922/2024 ABHINAV JINDAL .....Petitioner Through: Dr Kapil Goel, Mr. Sandeep Goel, Advs. Versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 52 1 .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar, SSC, Ms. Monica Benjamin, JSC, Ms. Easha Kadian, JSC. CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA VIBHU BAKHRU, ACJ. 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning a notice dated 31.03.2024 issued by respondent no.1/ Assessing Officer (hereafter the AO) under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter the Act); the order dated 23.04.2024 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act; notice dated 24.04.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Act in respect of the assessment year (AY) 2016-17. 2. It is the petitioner’s case that the impugned notice dated 24.04.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Act has been passed beyond the period of limitation. 3. After some arguments, it is apparent that the controversy involved is covered in favour of the petitioner by a decision of this court in Manju W.P.(C) No.7405/2024 Page 1 of 11 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RAM KUMAR Signing Date:23.01.2025 19:19:55 Somani v. Income Tax Officer Ward-70(1) & Ors: Neutral Citation: 2024:DHC:5411-DB. 4. We also consider it apposite to refer to the following passages of the decision of the Supreme Court in Union of India & Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal: 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2693 whereby the said view has been upheld. “46. The ingredients of the proviso could be broken down for analysis as follows: (i) no notice under Section 148 of the new regime can be issued at any time for an assessment year beginning on or before 1 April 2021; (ii) if