[Cites 10, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Ashaben Chandrakant Ashar vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Income Tax ... on 20 January, 2026
Author: A.S. Supehia
Bench: A.S. Supehia
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17566/2022 ORDER DATED: 20/01/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17566 of 2022
==========================================================
ASHABEN CHANDRAKANT ASHAR
Versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, INCOME TAX OFFICE
==========================================================
Appearance:
DARSHAN R PATEL(8486) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
KARAN G SANGHANI(7945) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI
Date : 20/01/2026
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)
1. Registry shall accept appearance note of
learned Senior Standing Counsel Mr.Maunil Yajnik
on behalf of the respondent authorities.
2. This petition is filed under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India challenging the notice
under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961
(For short "the Act") dated 30.06.2022 on the
ground that the notice would be invalid and time
barred.
3. Brief facts of the case are that the
respondent Assessing Officer issued notice dated
11.06.2021 under section 148 of the Act for the
Assessment Year 2017-2018 during the extended
time period as per Taxation and Other Laws
(Relaxation of Certain Provisions) Ordinance,
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17566/2022 ORDER DATED: 20/01/2026
undefined
2020 [(2020) 422 ITR (St.) 116] (For short
"TOLA").
4. In view of the decision of Apex Court in case
of Union of India and others v. Ashish Agarwal ,
(2022) 444 ITR 1 (SC), the aforesaid notice was
to be treated as notice under section 148A(b) of
the Act, which has come into statute with effect
from 01.04.2021.
5. The Apex Court in the case of Union of India
v. Rajeev Bansal, (2024) 469 ITR 46 (SC) has laid
down the law to consider such notice as valid
notice or invalid notice depending upon the
surviving time left between the date of issuance
of notice under section 148 of the Act read with
section 3(1) of TOLA upto 30.06.2021 and the
issuance of notice under section 148 pursuant to
the directions issued by the Apex Court in the
case of Ashish Agarwal (supra).
6. This Court in the case of Dhanraj Govindram
Kella v. Income Tax Officer, Ward(2),
Surendranagar (Judgment dated 08.07.2025 rendered
in Special Civil Application No.6387 of 2023 and
allied matters) has considered in detail the
submissions made by both the sides and has held
as under:
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17566/2022 ORDER DATED: 20/01/2026
undefined
"65. The alternative contention of the petitioner
as to whether notices would be valid notice or
invalid notice considering 'surviving time'
between the date of the issuance of notices under
TOLA and 30th June, 2021 or not is required to be
considered and for that each matter has to be
considered separately on the basis of the facts
of case considering the date of issuance of
notices under section 148 under TOLA by the
Revenue and thereafter date of supplying
information to the assessee and date of passing
of order under section 148A(d) and date of
issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act
so as to consider whether issuance of notice
under section 148 of the Act is within 'surviving
time' as per the direction of Hon'ble Apex Court
in case of Rajeev Bansal (supra) or not.
66. So far as Assessment Years 2013-2014 and
2014-2015 are concerned, the period of three
years from the end of the assessment year would
be over prior to 20.03.2020 and the period of six
years would be over between 20.03.2020 and
30.06.2021. Therefore, the notices issued under
section 148 of the Act under old regime between
01.04.2021 and 30.06.2021 as per TOLA, will be a
valid notice if the notice under section 148 of
the Act under new regime is issued within the
period of 'surviving time' as per the directions
issued by Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Rajeev
Bansal (supra). For the Assessment Years 2016-
2017 and 2017-2018 are concerned, the notice
issued under section 148 of the Act under old
regime between 01.04.2021 and 30.06.2021 under
TOLA would be considered to be issued within
three years from the end of the relevant
assessment year as three years would complete
within the period of 20.03.2020 and 30.06.2021.
67. Therefore, in facts of these petitions,
following data is required to be considered to
find out 'surviving time' to decide as to whether
the impugned notices under section 148 of the Act
issued under the new regime as per the decision
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17566/2022 ORDER DATED: 20/01/2026
undefined
of Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Ashish Agarwal
(supra) would be valid notice or not in view of
the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of
Rajeev Bansal (supra):
SCA NO AY Date of No of days Date of
notice under of surviving providing
section 148 time information
under TOLA available under
till section
30.06.2021 148A(b)
6387/2023 2013-2014 17.06.2021 13 26.05.2022
5688/2023 2014-2015 09.06.2021 21 23.05.2022
22260/2022 2016-2017 30.06.2021 1 23.05.2022
996/2023 2017-2018 30.06.2021 1 24.05.2022
SCA NO Due date Date of Date of Last date for issuance
of filing reply:- order of notice under
reply under section 148 as per
section surviving time:-
148A(d)
and notice
under
section
148:-
6387/2023 09.06.2022 04.06.2022 29.07.2022 22.06.2022
5688/2023 06.06.2022 - 27.07.2022 27.06.2022
22260/2022 07.06.2022 06.07.2022 30.07.2022 14.06.2022
996/2023 11.06.2022 10.06.2022 19.07.2022 18.06.2022
68. It is apparent from the above details that
impugned notice under section 148 of the Act is
issued beyond the period of 'surviving time' as
per the direction of Hon'ble Apex Court in case
of Rajeev Bansal (supra)and therefore, such
notices would be invalid notices.
69.The impugned notices issued under section 148
of the Act are accordingly quashed and set aside
being invalid having been issued beyond the
'surviving time'. Accordingly, impugned orders
passed under section 148A(d) of the Act would
also not survive and are accordingly, quashed and
set aside. Subsequent proceedings, if any,
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17566/2022 ORDER DATED: 20/01/2026
undefined
undertaken by the respondent would not survive
and are also quashed and set aside.
70. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid
extent. No order as to costs."
7. In the facts of the case, the respondent
Assessing Officer has provided information
pursuant to the directions issued by the Apex
Court in the case of Ashish Agarwal (supra) on
17.05.2022 and therefore, considering 15 days'
time to file reply by the assessee, the due date
would be 01.06.2022. The petitioner filed reply
on 30.05.2022. The order under section 148A(d) of
the Act as well as notice under section 148 of
the Act was issued on 30.06.2022. However,
considering the period of limitation from the
date of issuance of notice under section 148 read
with TOLA upto 30.06.2021, the limitation for
issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act
applying the decisions of Apex Court in the case
of Ashish Agarwal (supra) as well as Rajeev
Bansal (supra), would be 18.06.2022.
8. Learned Senior Standing Counsel Mr.Yajnik has
verified the above dates and could not controvert
the same.
9. In view of above, the impugned notice dated
30.06.2022 issued under section 148 of the Act
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17566/2022 ORDER DATED: 20/01/2026
undefined
would be invalid notice as the said notice is
issued after 18.06.2022 as per the decision of
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ashish Agarwal
(supra). Therefore, the impugned notice having
been issued beyond the 'surviving time' would be
invalid notice as held by the Apex Court in the
case of Rajeev Bansal (supra) in the following
paragraph Nos.114(g) and 114(h) of the judgment:
"114. In view of the above discussion, we
conclude that:
xxx
(g) The time during which the show-cause notices
were deemed to be stayed is from the date of
issuance of the deemed notice between April 1,
2021 and June 30, 2021 till the supply of
relevant information and material by the
Assessing Officers to the assessees in terms of
the directions issued by this court in Union of
India v. Ashish Agarwal [(2022) 444 ITR 1 (SC);
(2023) 1 SCC 617.] , and the period of two weeks
allowed to the assessees to respond to the show-
cause notices; and
(h) The Assessing Officers were required to issue
the reassessment notice under section 148 of the
new regime within the time limit surviving under
the Income-tax Act read with the Taxation and
other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain
Provisions) Act, 2020. All notices issued beyond
the surviving period are time barred and liable
to be set aside."
10. In view of foregoing reasons, impugned notice
dated 30.06.2022 is hereby quashed and set aside
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17566/2022 ORDER DATED: 20/01/2026
undefined
and all consequential proceedings are also
quashed and set aside.
Sd/-
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J)
Sd/-
(PRANAV TRIVEDI, J)
NVMEWADA/59
