Gujarat High Court
Prashil Securities Pvt. Ltd vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1)(1), ... on 14 October, 2025
Author: Bhargav D. Karia
Bench: Bhargav D. Karia
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/7344/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/10/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7344 of 2023
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
PRASHIL SECURITIES PVT. LTD.
Versus
THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR SUDHIR M MEHTA(2058) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MS SHAILEE S MEHTA(5873) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MS MAITHILI D MEHTA(3206) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI
Date : 14/10/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA)
1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Sudhir Mehta
for the petitioner and learned Senior
Standing Counsel Ms. Maithili Mehta for
the respondents.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/7344/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/10/2025
undefined
2. The petitioner has challenged notices
issued under section 148 of the Income Tax
Act, 1961 (for short "the Act") for the
Assessment Year 2015-2016 under the old
regime in view of TOLA without issuing
notice under section 148A(b) as required
to be issued with effect from 01.04.2021.
3. Notice under section 148 under Taxation
and Other Laws (Relaxation of Certain
ITR (St.) 116] (For short "TOLA") was
issued on 24.06.2021 whereas notice under
section 148A(b) of the Act after judgment
in case of Union of India and others v.
Ashish Agarwal reported in (2022) 444 ITR
1 (SC) was issued on 24.05.2022.
4. The respondent-Assessing Officer has
issued notice under section 148 of the Act
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/7344/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/10/2025
undefined
after 31.03.2021 on the pretext that due
to operation of TOLA, time limit for
issuance of notice would be extended upto
30.06.2021.
5. Thereafter, considering the decision of
Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Ashish
Agarwal (supra), notice issued under
section 148 between 01.04.2021 and
30.06.2021 for Assessment Year 2015-2016
was deemed to be notice under section
148A(b) of the Act which has come into
operation with effect from 01.04.2021 and
thereafter as per the direction issued by
the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Ashish
Agarwal(supra) department has issued the
notices under section 148 of the Act
between the month of July,2022 and August,
2022 after following the procedure of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/7344/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/10/2025
undefined
inviting reply and passing order under
section 148A(d) of the Act.
6. The petitioners challenged such notices
issued by the respondent Assessing Officer
for Assessment Year 2015-2016 pursuant to
the order of Hon'ble Apex Court in case of
Ashish Agarwal(supra).
7. During the pendency of these petitions,
similar notices which were issued for
Assessment Years 2013-2014 to 2017-2018
came up for consideration on the ground of
delay as well as on the ground of getting
valid sanction before this Court and other
High Courts. This Court in case of Keenara
Industries (P.) Ltd vs. ITO reported in
[2023] 147 taxamann.com 585 (Guj) allowed
such petitions.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/7344/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/10/2025
undefined
8. The matter was carried to Hon'ble Supreme
Court. Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of
Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal reported
in (2024) 469 ITR 46 (SC) decided the
issues raised with regard to delay as per
the provisions of section 149 of the Act
which has come into operation after
01.04.2021 as well as validity of sanction
granted under section 155 of the Act.
9. During the course of hearing before the
Hon'ble Apex Court, Revenue conceded to
the effect that so far as Assessment Year
2015-2016 is concerned, Revenue could not
have issued the notices under section 3(1)
of TOLA as considering the time period as
prescribed under section 149 of the Act
with effect from 01.04.2021, three years
would be over on 31.03.2019 which is prior
to coming into force of TOLA and six years
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/7344/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/10/2025
undefined
would be completed on 31.03.2022 which is
after operation of TOLA. In such
circumstances, notices for Assessment Year
2015-2016 are held to be invalid by
Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Rajeev
Bansal(supra).
10. The Hon'ble Apex Court followed the
decision of Rajeev Bansal(supra) in case
of Deepak Steel and Power Ltd vs. Central
Board of Direct Taxes reported in [2025]
174 taxmann.com 144 (SC) and after
recording the concession of the learned
advocate for the department and in view of
the concession given before the Apex Court
by learned advocate appearing for the
Revenue as recorded in para 19(f) of the
judgment in case of Rajeev Bansal (supra),
has quashed and set aside the notice
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/7344/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/10/2025
undefined
issued after 31.03.2021 under TOLA for
A.Y. 2015-16 as under:
"1. Leave granted.
2. These appeals arise from the order
passed by the High Court of Orissa at
Cuttack in Writ Petition (C) Nos. 2446
of 2023, 2543 of 2023 dated 1.2.2023
and 2544 of 2023 dated 10.02.2023
respectively by which the High Court
disposed of the original writ petitions
in the following terms:-
"1. The memo of appearance filed by
Mr. S. S. Mohapatra, learned Senior
Standing Counsel for Revenue
Department on behalf of Opposite
Parties is taken on record.
2. In view of the order passed by
this Court on 1st December, 2022 in
a batch of writ petitions of which
W.P.(C) No.9191 of 2022 (Kailash
Kedia v. Income Tax Officer) was a
lead matter and the subsequent order
dated 10th January, 2023 passed in
W.P.(C) No.36314 of 2022 (Shiv
Mettalicks Pvt. Ltd., Rourkela v.
Principal Commissioner of Income
Tax, Sambalpur), the Court declines
to entertain the present writ
petition, but leaves it open to the
Petitioner to raise all grounds
available to the Petitioner in
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/7344/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/10/2025
undefined
accordance with law including the
grounds urged in the present
petition at the appropriate stage as
explained by the Court in those
orders.
3. The writ petition is disposed of
in the above terms."
3. We heard Mr. Saswat Kumar Acharya,
the learned counsel appearing for the
appellants(assessee) and Mr.
Chandrashekhar, the learned counsel
appearing for the revenue.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the
revenue with his usual fairness invited
the attention of this Court to a three
judge bench decision of this Court in
Union of India and Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal,
reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2693, more
particularly, paragraph 19(f) which reads
thus:-
"19. (f) The Revenue concedes that
for the assessment year 2015- 2016,
all notices issued on or after April
1, 2021 will have to be dropped as
they will not fall for completion
during the period prescribed under
the Taxation and other Laws
(Relaxation and Amendment of Certain
Provisions) Act, 2020."
5. As the revenue made a concession in
the aforesaid decision that is for the
assessment year 2015-2016, all notices
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/7344/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/10/2025
undefined
issued on or after 1st April, 2021 will
have to be dropped as they would not fall
for completion during the period
prescribed under the taxation and other
laws (Relaxation and Amendment of certain
Provisions Act, 2020). Nothing further is
required to be adjudicated in this matter
as the notices so far as the present
litigation is concerned is dated
25.6.2021.
6. In view of the aforesaid, in such
circumstances referred to above the
original writ petition nos.2446 of 2023,
2543 of 2023 and 2544 of 2023
respectively filed before the High Court
of Orissa at Cuttack stands allowed.
7. The impugned notice therein stands
quashed and set aside.
8. The relief in terms of prayer (a) is
granted.
9. The appeals stand disposed of in the
above terms.
10. Pending application(s), if any, stand
disposed of."
11. Similar orders are also passed by the Apex
Court in the following cases:
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/7344/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/10/2025
undefined
1) Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle 19(1) and ors vs. Nehal Ashit Shah
in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary
No. 57209/2024;
2) The Income Tax Officer Ward 1(2)
Jaipur vs. R.K.Build Creations Private
Limited in Special Leave Petition (Civil)
Diary No. 59625/2024.
12. The Delhi High Court has also passed the
similar order in following cases:
1) Bhagwan Sahai Sharma vs. Deputy
Commissioner of Income Tax reported in
[2025] 174 taxmann.com 14 (Delhi)
2) Lalit Gulati vs. Assistant
Commissioner of Income Tax reported in
[2025] 174 taxmann.com 273 (Delhi);
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/7344/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/10/2025
undefined
13. The Punjab and Haryana High Court has
taken similar decision in case of Jay Jay
Agro Industries vs. Income Tax Officer,
Ward-I, Karnal & Anr in CWP 7405/2025
14. Rajasthan High Court has also taken
similar decision in case of Shreyansh
Mehta S/o Shri Shanti Lal Mehta, vs.
Income Tax Officer, Udaipur in Civil Writ
Petition No. 3299/2023.
15. Karnataka High Court has also taken
similar decision in case of Shri Siddaiah
Gurappaji vs. The Assistant Commissioner
of Income Tax and ors in Writ Petition No.
20292 of 2023.
16. This Court also in case of Mayurkumar
Babubhai Patel v. Assistant Commissioner
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/7344/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/10/2025
undefined
of Income Tax, Circle 3(1)(1), Ahmedabad
and another (order dated 17.06.2025
rendered in Special Civil Application
No.3154 of 2022 and allied matters) has
held as under:
"15. Considering the facts of the
case, it is not in dispute that the
respondent-Assessing Officer has
issued the notice under section
148A(b) of the Act after the period of
six years were over on 31.03.2022. As
observed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in
case of Deepak Steel and Power
Ltd(Supra) and in view of the
concession made by the Revenue before
the Apex Court for the Assessment Year
2015-16, all the notices issued on or
after 01.04.2021 will have to be
dropped as they would not fall for
completion during the period
prescribed under the Taxation and
Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment
of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 and
therefore, nothing further is required
to be adjudicated in the matters as
the notice so far as the present
petitions are concerned, though dated
31.03.2021, admittedly have been
issued after 01.04.2021.
16. It is also not in dispute that the
notices under section 148A(b) have
been issued pursuant to the decision
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/7344/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/10/2025
undefined
of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Ashish
Agarwal (supra) dated 04.05.2022
admittedly after 31.03.2022.
Therefore, on both counts, the notices
issued under section 148 of the Act
dated 27/28/29.07.2022 would be time
barred."
17. In view of above, for the foregoing
reasons, the petition is allowed. The
impugned notice issued under section 148
of the Act for Assessment Year 2015-2016
is held to be invalid as same was issued
during the extended period from 01.04.2021
to 30.06.2021 under TOLA.
Petition is accordingly disposed of. Rule
is made absolute.
(BHARGAV D. KARIA, J)
(PRANAV TRIVEDI,J)
JYOTI V. JANI
