Madhya Pradesh High Court
Late Smt Manorama Holkar Thr. Lrs. Shri ... vs Income Tax Department And Others on 25 July, 2025
Author: Vivek Rusia
Bench: Vivek Rusia
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:19495
1
W.P. Nos.19085 of 2022 & Others
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT I N D O R E
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI
WRIT PETITION No. 19085 of 2022
SANDEEP SINGH SALUJA
Versus
INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT AND OTHERS
WITH
WRIT PETITION No. 19516 of 2022
M/S SPACE ENCLAVE PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR
SHRI RAJEEV SHRIVASTAVA
Versus
INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 20194 of 2022
RAMESH CHANDRA JAIN
Versus
REVENUE DEPARTMENT AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 20285 of 2022
NIRMAL KUMAR RAWAL
Versus
REVENUE DEPARTMENT AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 20788 of 2022
VISHAL SAHU
Versus
CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 20790 of 2022
MOSHIN ALI MERCHANT
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: RAVI PRAKASH
Signing time: 28-07-2025
14:20:05
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:19495
2
W.P. Nos.19085 of 2022 & Others
Versus
CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 20798 of 2022
LATE SMT MANORAMA HOLKAR THR. LRS. SHRI TANSEN HOLKAR
Versus
AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 21637 of 2022
GOPAL GUPTA
Versus
CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 21640 of 2022
M/S SHREE NAIVEDYA FINCOM PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH
DIRECTOR JITENDRA KUMAR JAIN
Versus
CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 22055 of 2022
SNG GLOBAL PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH DIRECTOR SHRI
MANISH AGRAWAL
Versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER 5 (1), INDORE AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 28044 of 2022
SHREE NAIVEDYA FINCOM PRIVATE LIMITED
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 28184 of 2022
SHREE GANPATLAL ONKARLAL AGRAWAL AND COMPANY
THROUGH VIKAS BANSAL
Versus
UNION OF INDIA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY MINISTRY OF FINANCE
(DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE) AND OTHERS
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: RAVI PRAKASH
Signing time: 28-07-2025
14:20:05
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:19495
3
W.P. Nos.19085 of 2022 & Others
WRIT PETITION No. 28417 of 2022
CAMPUS POLY PLAST PVT. LTD.
Versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(1) INDORE AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 2742 of 2023
PTC POLICE WELFARE SOCIETY THROUGH AUTHORISED
SIGNATORY MS. SUNITA RAWAT
Versus
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 4 (1) AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 2745 of 2023
PTC POLICE WELFARE SOCIETY THROUGH AUTHORISED
SIGNATORY MS. SUNITA RAWAT
Versus
ASSISTNAT COMMISSIONER OF INOCME TAX 4(1) AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 4930 of 2023
M/S GULSHANRAI JAIN II THROUGH PARTNER SHRI NAVEEN JAIN
Versus
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 (1) AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 5688 of 2023
TSD REALITY PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH DIRECTOR SHRI
SURESH KUMAR DOSHI
Versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 5803 of 2023
VIJIT VIJAY RAMAVAT
Versus
CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 5989 of 2023
SWAPNIL SNEHIL ENTERPRISES PVT LTD. THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR
MR. SWAPNIL MEHTA
Versus
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: RAVI PRAKASH
Signing time: 28-07-2025
14:20:05
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:19495
4
W.P. Nos.19085 of 2022 & Others
CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 6000 of 2023
SWAPNIL SENHIL ENTERPRISES PVT LTD. THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR
MR SWAPNIL MEHTA
Versus
CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 6304 of 2023
SATYANARAYA
Versus
CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 6307 of 2023
RADHESHYAM GUPTA
Versus
CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 6599 of 2023
VISHAL PORWAL
Versus
CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 6702 of 2023
N F FARMS (AOP) THRU AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SHRI
IQBAL QAMAR
Versus
CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 6898 of 2023
NF FARMS (AOP) THROUGH AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SHRI
IQBAL QAMAR
Versus
CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 6956 of 2023
MOHAMMAD YAHYA RANGOONWALA
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: RAVI PRAKASH
Signing time: 28-07-2025
14:20:05
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:19495
5
W.P. Nos.19085 of 2022 & Others
Versus
CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 7066 of 2023
M/S KRISHIDHAN SEEDS PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH DIRECTOR
SHRI SUSHIL KARWA
Versus
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 (1) AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 7067 of 2023
YASH GOYAL
Versus
DCIT/ACIT 4(1) AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 7069 of 2023
M/S KRISHIDHAN SEEDS PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH DIRECTOR
SHRI SUSHIL KARWA
Versus
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 (1) AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 7143 of 2023
YASH GOYAL
Versus
DCIT / ACIT 4 (1) INDORE AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 7148 of 2023
TSD INFRASTATE PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH DIRECTOR SHRI
SURESH KUMAR DOSHI
Versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER 5 (1) INDORE AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 7149 of 2023
TSD INFRASTATE PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH DIRECTOR SHRI
SURESH KUMAR DOSHI
Versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER 5 (1) INDORE AND OTHERS
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: RAVI PRAKASH
Signing time: 28-07-2025
14:20:05
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:19495
6
W.P. Nos.19085 of 2022 & Others
WRIT PETITION No. 7154 of 2023
SEEMANDHAR DEVBUILDING PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH
DIRECTOR SHRI SURESH KUMAR DOSHI
Versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER 5 (1) INDORE AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 7166 of 2023
SEEMADHAR DEVBUILD PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH DIRECTOR
SHRI SURESH KUMAR DOSHI
Versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER 5 (1), INDORE AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 7238 of 2023
SUNIL KUMAR SABOO
Versus
DCIT/ ACIT 1(1) AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 8046 of 2023
M/S AD MANUM FINANCE LIMITED THROUGH CFO MR VIKAS
GUPTA
Versus
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRLCE (1)
WRIT PETITION No. 8374 of 2023
JAJOO SURGICAL PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH DIRECTOR SHRI
VISHNU BHAGWAN JAJOO
Versus
DCIT ACIT 1 (1) INDORE AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 8375 of 2023
AMIT KUMAR VAISH
Versus
DCIT ACIT 1 (1) AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 8728 of 2023
NEMI CHAND MARU
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: RAVI PRAKASH
Signing time: 28-07-2025
14:20:05
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:19495
7
W.P. Nos.19085 of 2022 & Others
Versus
DCIT ACIT 1 AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 9160 of 2023
OMPRAKASH DHANWANI
Versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER 2(1) AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 9545 of 2023
AGRO COMMODITY PVT. LTD. THROUGH DIRECTOR SHRI SUNIL
KUMAR SABOO
Versus
DCIT/ ACIT TAX 1(1) INDORE AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 10143 of 2023
BHAGYESH DWIVEDI
Versus
NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE ASSESSMENT UNIT /
VERIFICATION UNIT/ TECHNICAL UNIT/ REVIEW UNIT AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 10852 of 2023
UNION COMMODITIES PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH ITS
AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE NITESH KUMAR KABRA
Versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER ITO 4 (3), INDORE AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 10854 of 2023
SHRI SANWARIA COMMODITIES PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH ITS
AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE NITESH KUMAR KABRA
Versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER ITO 5(1) AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 11845 of 2023
RITSPIN SYNTHETICS LTD. THROUGH DIRECTOR SHRI BHAGWAN
SINGH SURYAWANSHI
Versus
DCIT / ACIT 1 (1) AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 11924 of 2023
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: RAVI PRAKASH
Signing time: 28-07-2025
14:20:05
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:19495
8
W.P. Nos.19085 of 2022 & Others
HI LINK CITY HOMES PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH DIRECTOR SHRI
VIRENDRA GUPTA
Versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER 2 (1) AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 11979 of 2023
EXCLUSIVE SECURITIES LIMITED THROUGH DIRECTOR SHRI
YOGESH GUPTA
Versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER 1 (2) AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 12032 of 2023
BRILLIANT SPACES LIMITED (SINCE MERGED INTO BRILLIANT
ESTATES LTD.) THROUGH DIRECTOR SHRI SANJAY CHO
Versus
DCIT / ACIT 1 (1) AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 14868 of 2023
PARVEZ QURESHI
Versus
DCIT/ACIT 1 (1) AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri P.M. Choudhary assisted by Shri Anand Prabhawalkar, Shri Ashish
Goyal, Shri Ibrahim Kannodwala, Shri Aditya Goyal, Shri Arun Dwivedi, Shri Jatin
Sehgal, Shri Vijay Kumar Asudani, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Shri Harsh Parashar along with Ms. Yashika Bondwal, learned counsel for
the respondent.
Reserved on : 27th June, 2025
Delivered on : 25th July, 2025
ORDER
Per : Justice Vivek Rusia
This batch of writ petitions have been filed under Article 226
of the Constitution of India challenging the validity of reassessment
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:19495
W.P. Nos.19085 of 2022 & Others
proceedings initiated under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961
(hereinafter referred to as "the IT Act") on the ground that the same
are barred by limitation and are contrary to the scheme of the IT Act
post the Finance Act, 2021.
02. In all the present cases, the respective Assessing Officers had
issued notices under the erstwhile Section 148 of the IT Act between
01.04.2021 and 30.06.2021 purportedly relying upon the relaxations
under the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of
Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 (TOLA). These notices were, later on,
treated to be notices issued under Section 148A(b) of the IT Act in
view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Union of India
v/s Ashish Agrawal reported in (2022) 444 ITR 1 (SC).
Subsequently, reply and objections were submitted by assesses and
orders under Section 148A (d) were passed which further led to
issuance of fresh notices under Section 148 of the IT Act.
03. The petitioners in all these cases have challenged the
impugned notices issued under Section 148 and the preceding orders
under Section 148A (d) primarily on the ground that the reassessment
proceedings are barred by limitation under the amended provisions of
Section 149 of the IT Act as inserted by the Finance Act, 2021 and
clarified by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Union of India v/s Rajeev
Bansal reported in (2024) 469 ITR 46 (SC).
LEGAL BACKGROUND
04. The Finance Act, 2021 brought into force a new regime
(Sections 147 to 151 of the IT Act) for reassessment with effect from
01.04.2021. The amended Section 149 of the IT Act provided the
time limit for issuance of notice under Section 148. Section 149 is as
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:19495
W.P. Nos.19085 of 2022 & Others
follows:-
149.(1) No notice under section 148 shall be issued for
the relevant assessment year,--
(a) if three years and three months have elapsed from the
end of the relevant assessment year, unless the case falls
under clause (b);
(b) if three years and three months, but not more than five
years and three months, have elapsed from the end of the
relevant assessment year unless the Assessing Officer has in
his possession books of account or other documents or
evidence related to any asset or expenditure or transaction or
entries which show that the income chargeable to tax, which
has escaped assessment, amounts to or is likely to amount to
fifty lakh rupees or more.
(2) No notice to show cause under section 148A shall be
issued for the relevant assessment year,--
(a) if three years have elapsed from the end of the relevant
assessment year, unless the case falls under clause (b);
(b) if three years, but not more than five years, have elapsed
from the end of the relevant assessment year unless the
income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment, as
per the information with the Assessing Officer, amounts to
or is likely to amount to fifty lakh rupees or more.''
05. The Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of
Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 (TOLA) was enacted to extend
limitation periods during the COVID-19 pandemic under the old law.
It applied only to proceedings under the unamended Income Tax Act
prior to 01.04.2021.
06. The Hon'ble Apex Court in Ashish Agrawal (supra) held the
reassessment notices issued between 01.04.2021 and 30.06.2021
under the old regime as deemed notices under Section 148A(b).
However, the Court preserved all statutory defences, holding that:
"All defences which may be available to the assessee under Section
149 and/or which may be available under the Finance Act, 2021 and
in law and whatever rights are available to the Assessing Officer
under the Finance Act, 2021 are kept open..." Thus, the timeline
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:19495
W.P. Nos.19085 of 2022 & Others
restrictions under Section 149 as amended were untouched.
07. The CBDT issued Instruction No.1/2022 dated 11.05.2022
directing Assessing Officers to treat all notices issued under the old
Section 148 between 01.04.2021 and 30.06.2021 as deemed notices
under Section 148A(b). The instruction also permitted continuation
of reassessment proceedings under the assumption that extended
timelines under TOLA applied. This led to reopening of several
assessments beyond three years without verifying the conditions
under amended Section 149 which were challenged before the
Hon'ble Apex Court in Rajeev Bansal (supra) case.
08. These questions of limitation under the new reassessment
regime were finally answered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Rajeev
Bansal (supra) wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court considered the
interplay between:
(i) Notices deemed issued under Section 148A (b) pursuant
to Ashish Agrawal (supra);
(ii) Time saved (if any) under TOLA
(iii) The overriding limitation under the amended Section
149.''
09. The Hon'ble Apex Court held that reassessment notices
issued between 01.04.2021 and 30.06.2021 under the old Section 148
though deemed valid under Ashish Agrawal as notices under Section
148A(b) must strictly comply with the amended provisions of the
Income Tax Act, 1961 brought into force by the Finance Act, 2021.
The Hon'ble Apex Court ruled that such reassessments are barred by
limitation unless issued within three years under Section 149(1)(a) or
in cases exceeding three years but within ten where the Assessing
Officer demonstrates that the escaped income exceeds Rs. 50 lakhs
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:19495
W.P. Nos.19085 of 2022 & Others
and is represented in the form of an asset as per Section 149(1)(b).
The Hon'ble Apex Court further clarified that the benefit of the
TOLA Act cannot extend limitation under the amended regime and
that administrative instructions like CBDT Instruction No. 1/2022
cannot override the statutory framework.
10. The relevant paragraphs of Rajeev Bansal (supra) are as
follows:
''108. The Income-tax Act read with Taxation and other
Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions)
Act, 2020 extended the time limit for issuing reassessment
notices under section 148, which fell for completion from
March 20, 2020 to March 31, 2021, till June 30, 2021. All
the reassessment notices under challenge in the present
appeals were issued from April 1, 2021 to June 30, 2021
under the old regime. Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal
[(2022) 444 ITR 1 (SC); (2023) 1 SCC 617.] deemed these
reassessment notices under the old regime as show-cause
notices under the new regime with effect from the date of
issuance of the reassessment notices. The effect of creating
the legal fiction is that this court has to imagine as real all
the consequences and incidents that will inevitably flow
from the fiction. (East End Dwellings Co. Ltd. v. Finsbury
Borough Council [[1952] A.C. 109. (Lord Asquith, in his
concurring opinion, observed:"If you are bidden to treat an
imaginary state of affairs as real, you must surely, unless
prohibited from doing so, also imagine as real the
consequences and incidents which, if the putative state of
affairs had in fact existed, must inevitably have flowed from
or accompanied it.")] ) Therefore, the logical effect of the
creation of the legal fiction by Union of India v. Ashish
Agarwal [(2022) 444 ITR 1 (SC); (2023) 1 SCC 617.] is that
the time surviving under the Income-tax Act read with
Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of
Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 will be available to the
Revenue to complete the remaining proceedings in
furtherance of the deemed notices, including issuance of
reassessment notices under section 148 of the new regime.
The surviving or balance time limit can be calculated by
computing the number of days between the date of issuance
of the deemed notice and June 30, 2021.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:19495
W.P. Nos.19085 of 2022 & Others
109. If this court had not created the legal fiction and
the original reassessment notices were validly issued
according to the provisions of the new regime, the notices
under section 148 of the new regime would have to be issued
within the time limits extended by Taxation and other Laws
(Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act,
2020. As a corollary, the reassessment notices to be issued in
pursuance of the deemed notices must also be within the
time limit surviving under the Income-tax Act read with
Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of
Certain Provisions) Act, 2020. This construction gives full
effect to the legal fiction created in Union of India v. Ashish
Agarwal [(2022) 444 ITR 1 (SC); (2023) 1 SCC 617.] and
enables both the assessees and the Revenue to obtain the
benefit of all consequences flowing from the fiction. (See
State of A.P. v. A.P. Pensioners' Association [(2005) 13 SCC
161; 2006 SCC (L&S) 666. (This court observed that the
"legal fiction undoubtedly is to be construed in such a
manner so as to enable a person, for whose benefit such
legal fiction has been created, to obtain all consequences
flowing therefrom".)]
110. The effect of the creation of the legal fiction in
Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal [(2022) 444 ITR 1 (SC);
(2023) 1 SCC 617.] was that it stopped the clock of
limitation with effect from the date of issuance of section
148 notices under the old regime [which is also the date of
issuance of the deemed notices]. As discussed in the
preceding segments of this judgment, the period from the
date of the issuance of the deemed notices 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.] has to be excluded from the computation
of the period of limitation. Moreover, the period of two
weeks granted to the assessees to reply to the show-cause
notices must also be excluded in terms of the third proviso to
section 149.
111. The clock started ticking for the Revenue only
after it received the response of the assessees to the show-
causes notices. After the receipt of the reply, the Assessing
Officer had to perform the following responsibilities : (i)
consider the reply of the assessee under section 149A(c); (ii)
take a decision under section 149A(d) based on the available
material and the reply of the assessee; and (iii) issue a notice
under section 148 if it was a fit case for reassessment. Once
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:19495
W.P. Nos.19085 of 2022 & Others
the clock started ticking, the Assessing Officer was required
to complete these procedures within the surviving time limit.
The surviving time limit, as prescribed under the Income-tax
Act read with Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation and
Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020, was available
to the Assessing Officers to issue the reassessment notices
under section 148 of the new regime.
113. In Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal [(2022) 444
ITR 1 (SC); (2023) 1 SCC 617.] , this court allowed the
assessees to avail of all the defences, including the defence
of expiry of the time limit specified under section 149(1). In
the instant appeals, the reassessment notices pertain to the
assessment years 2013-2014, 2014-2015, 2015-2016, 2016-
2017, and 2017-2018. To assume jurisdiction to issue notices
under section 148 with respect to the relevant assessment
years, an Assessing Officer has to : (i) issue the notices
within the period prescribed under section 149(1) of the new
regime read with Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation and
Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020; and (ii) obtain
the previous approval of the authority specified under
section 151. A notice issued without complying with the
preconditions is invalid as it affects the jurisdiction of the
Assessing Officer. Therefore, the reassessment notices
issued under section 148 of the new regime, which are in
pursuance of the deemed notices, ought to be issued within
the time limit surviving under the Income-tax Act read with
Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of
Certain Provisions) Act, 2020. A reassessment notice issued
beyond the surviving time limit will be time-barred.
114. In view of the above discussion, we conclude
that:
(a) After April 1, 2021, the Income-tax Act has to be read
along with the substituted provisions;
(b) Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of
Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 will continue to apply to the
Income-tax Act after April 1, 2021 if any action or
proceeding specified under the substituted provisions of the
Income-tax Act falls for completion between March 20,
2020 and March 31, 2021;
(c) Section 3(1) of the Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation
and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 overrides
section 149 of the Income-tax Act only to the extent of
relaxing the time limit for issuance of a reassessment notice
under section 148;
(d) Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:19495
W.P. Nos.19085 of 2022 & Others
Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 will extend the time limit for
the grant of sanction by the authority specified under section
151. The test to determine whether Taxation and other Laws
(Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act,
2020 will apply to section 151 of the new regime is this: if
the time limit of three years from the end of an assessment
year falls between March 20, 2020 and March 31, 2021, then
the specified authority under section 151(i) has extended
time till June 30, 2021 to grant approval;
(e) In the case of section 151 of the old regime, the test is :
if the time limit of four years from the end of an assessment
year falls between March 20, 2020 and March 31, 2021, then
the specified authority under section 151(2) has extended
time till March 31, 2021 to grant approval;
(f) The directions in Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal
[(2022) 444 ITR 1 (SC); (2023) 1 SCC 617.] will extend to
all the ninety thousand reassessment notices issued under the
old regime during the period April 1, 2021 and June 30,
2021;
(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.''
11. In Paragraph 112 of the judgment, the Hon'ble Apex Court
gave the example/formula:-
''112. Let us take the instance of a notice issued on May
1, 2021 under the old regime for a relevant assessment year.
Because of the legal fiction, the deemed show-cause notices
will also come into effect from May 1, 2021. After
accounting for all the exclusions, the Assessing Officer will
have sixty-one days (days between May 1, 2021 and June
30, 2021) to issue a notice under section 148 of the new
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:19495
W.P. Nos.19085 of 2022 & Others
regime. This time starts ticking for the Assessing Officer
after receiving the response of the assessee. In this instance,
if the assessee submits the response on June 18, 2022, the
Assessing Officer will have sixty-one days from June 18,
2022 to issue a reassessment notice under section 148 of the
new regime. Thus, in this illustration, the time limit for
issuance of a notice under section 148 of the new regime
will end on August 18, 2022.''
12. This was further reaffirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in a
subsequent order dated 24.02.2025 in Deputy Commissioner of
Income Tax & Others v/s Reliance Industries Limited in SLP (C)
Diary No. 56889/2024 wherein the Court explained with a chart that
the date of original notice under Section 148, the deemed issuance
under 148A (b), the date of objections by the assessee and the final
notice under Section 148 must all fit within the framework of Para
112 of Rajeev Bansal (supra) and specifically observed that if the
final notice under Section 148 is issued beyond the prescribed period
it is liable to be declared time-barred.
13. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and
perused the record.
14. The present petitions came up for hearing on 27.06.2025
before this Court wherein after hearing the arguments the petitions
were reserved for orders. The petitioners during the hearing
submitted that the issue involved in the present petitions had already
been decided by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Rajeev Bansal (supra)
and deserves to be decided in the light of this decision.
15. This Court gave time to the counsel of assessees to file their
calculation of limitation period in their individual cases and further
gave time to the counsel of Income Tax department to check these
applications and to sort out the cases in which the impugned notices
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:19495
W.P. Nos.19085 of 2022 & Others
are time barred according to the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in
Rajeev Bansal (supra).
16. Pursuant to this order applications including the calculations
were filed by counsel of assessees in their respective cases which
were subsequently checked by the counsel of Income Tax
department. After this exercise was conducted a total of 46 cases
were found to be time barred wherein the notices are liable to be
quashed as they were issued beyond prescribed time.
17. The List of cases which are time barred are as follows:-
Time Barred - Notices issued beyond Limitation
As per Para 112 of Rajeev Bansal (Supra)
S. NO. ITE
WRIT
M PARTY NAME
PETITION NO.
NO.
1 17 Sandeep Singh Saluja Vs. Income Tax
Department
2 17.3 M/S Space Enclave Private Limited Through Its
19516/2022 Director Shri Rajeev Shrivastava Vs. Income Tax
Department
3 17.8 20194/2022 Ramesh Chandra Jain Vs. Revenue Department
4 17.11 20285/2022 Nirmal Kumar Rawal Vs. Revenue Department
5 17.12 20788/2022 Vishal Sahu Vs. Central Board Of Direct Taxes
6 17.13 Moshin Ali Merchant Vs. Central Board Of
Direct Taxes
7 17.14 Late Smt Manorama Holkar Thr. Lrs. Shri
Tansen Holkar Vs.
8 17.15 21637/2022 Gopal Gupta Vs. Central Board Of Direct Taxes
9 17.16 M/S Shree Naivedya Fincom Private Limited
21640/2022 Through Director Jitendra Kumar Jain Vs.
Central Board Of Direct Taxes
10 17.17 Sng Global Private Limited Through Director
22055/2022 Shri Manish Agrawal Vs. Income Tax Officer 5
(1), Indore
11 17.23 Shree Naivedya Fincom Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union Of
India & Ors
12 17.24 Shree Ganpatlal Onkarlal Agarwal Vs. Union Of
India & Ors
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:19495
W.P. Nos.19085 of 2022 & Others
13 17.25 Campus Poly Plast Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Income Tax
Officer 1(1) Indore
14 17.28 PTC Police Welfare Society Through Authorised
2742/2023 Signatory Ms. Sunita Rawat Vs. Assistant
Commissioner Of Income Tax 4 (1)
15 17.29 Ptc Police Welfare Society Through Authorised
2745/2023 Signatory Ms. Sunita Rawat Vs. Assistnat
Commissioner Of Inocme Tax 4(1)
16 17.34 M/S Gulshanrai Jain Ii Through Partner Shri
4930/2023 Naveen Jain Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of
Income Tax 1 (1)
17 17.39 TSD Reality Private Limited Through Director
5688/2023 Shri Suresh Kumar Doshi Vs. Income Tax
Officer
18 17.40 Vijit Vijay Ramavat Vs. Central Board Of Direct
Taxes
19 17.41 Swapnil Snehil Enterprises Pvt Ltd. Through Its
5989/2023 Director Mr. Swapnil Mehta Vs. Central Board
Of Direct Taxes
20 17.42 Swapnil Senhil Enterprises Pvt Ltd. Through Its
6000/2023 Director Mr Swapnil Mehta Vs. Central Board
Of Direct Taxes
21 17.44 6304/2023 Satyanaraya Vs. Central Board Of Direct Taxes
22 17.45 Radheshyam Gupta Vs. Central Board Of Direct
Taxes
23 17.47 6599/2023 Vishal Porwal Vs. Central Board Of Direct Taxes
24 17.48 N F Farms (Aop) Thru Authorized
6702/2023 Representative Shri Iqbal Qamar Vs. Central
Board Of Direct Taxes
25 17.49 Nf Farms (Aop) Through Authorized
6898/2023 Representative Shri Iqbal Qamar Vs. Central
Board Of Direct Taxes
26 17.50 Mohammad Yahya Rangoonwala Vs. Central
Board Of Direct Taxes
27 17.53 M/S Krishidhan Seeds Private Limited Through
7066/2023 Director Shri Sushil Karwa Vs. Assistant
Commissioner Of Income Tax 1 (1)
28 17.54 7067/2023 Yash Goyal Vs. DCIT/ACIT4(1)
29 17.55 M/S Krishidhan Seeds Private Limited Through
7069/2023 Director Shri Sushil Karwa Vs. Assistant
Commissioner Of Income Tax 1 (1)
30 17.58 7143/2023 Yash Goyal Vs. DCIT / ACIT 4 (1) Indore
31 17.59 7148/2023 TSD Infrastate Private Limited Through Director
Shri Suresh Kumar Doshi Vs. Income Tax
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:19495
W.P. Nos.19085 of 2022 & Others
Officer 5 (1) Indore
32 TSD Infrastate Private Limited Through Director
17.60 7149/2023 Shri Suresh Kumar Doshi Vs. Income Tax
Officer 5 (1) Indore
33 Seemandhar Devbuilding Private Limited
17.61 7154/2023 Through Director Shri Suresh Kumar Doshi Vs.
Income Tax Officer 5 (1) Indore
34 Seemadhar Devbuild Private Limited Through
17.62 7166/2023 Director Shri Suresh Kumar Doshi Vs. Income
Tax Officer 5 (1), Indore
35 17.65 7238/2023 Sunil Kumar Saboo Vs. DCIT/ ACIT 1(1)
36 17.67 M/S Ad Manum Finance Limited Through Cfo
8046/2023 Mr Vikas Gupta Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of
Income Tax Cirlce (1)
37 17.68 Jajoo Surgical Private Limited Through Director
8374/2023 Shri Vishnu Bhagwan Jajoo Vs. DCIT ACIT 1
(1) Indore
38 17.69 8375/2023 Amit Kumar Vaish Vs. DCIT ACIT 1 (1)
39 17.71 8728/2023 Nemi Chand Maru Vs. DCIT ACIT 1
40 17.73 Omprakash Dhanwani Vs. Income Tax Officer
2(1)
41 17.75 Agro Commodity Pvt. Ltd. Through Director
9545/2023 Shri Sunil Kumar Saboo Vs. DCIT/ ACIT Tax
1(1) Indore
42 17.80 Bhagyesh Dwivedi Vs. National Faceless
Assessment
43 Union Commodities Private Limited Through Its
17.83 10852/2023 Authorized Representative Nitesh Kumar Kabra
Vs. Income Tax Officer Ito 4 (3), Indore
44 Shri Sanwaria Commodities Private Limited
17.84 10854/2023 Through Its Authorized Representative Nitesh
Kumar Kabra Vs. Income Tax Officer Ito 5(1)
45 17.86 Ritspin Synthetics Ltd. Through Director Shri
11845/2023 Bhagwan Singh Suryawanshi Vs. DCIT / ACIT 1
46 17.88 Hi Link City Homes Private Limited Through
11924/2023 Director Shri Virendra Gupta Vs. Income Tax
Officer 2 (1)
47 17.89 Exclusive Securities Limited Through Director
Shri Yogesh Gupta Vs. Income Tax Officer 1 (2)
48 17.90 Brilliant Spaces Limited (Since Merged Into Brilliant
12032/2023 Estates Ltd.) Through Director Shri Sanjay Cho Vs.
DCIT / ACIT 1 (1)
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:19495
W.P. Nos.19085 of 2022 & Others
49 17.92 14868/2023 Parvez Qureshi Vs. DCIT/ACIT1 (1)
18. In all the above petitions notices under Section 148 (un-
amended) were issued between 01.04.2021 and 30.06.2021. The said
notices were treated as deemed notices under Section 148A (b)
pursuant to the directions of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Ashish
Agrawal (supra). After issuing show-cause notices under Section
148A (b), reply /objection were filed by the assessees, orders under
Section 148A (d) were passed and fresh reassessment notices under
Section 148 (as amended) were issued most of which are dated post-
July 2022. All the above listed petitions are covered by the decision
given by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Rajeev Bansal (supra).
19. In view of the foregoing facts and discussions we find that the
impugned notices in all the above listed petitions were issued beyond
prescribed time and thus are held as time barred. The impugned
notices in the petitions listed above are quashed.
20. With the aforesaid, all the aforesaid Writ Petition stand
disposed of.
Let a copy of this order be kept in the aforesaid writ petitions
also.
(VIVEK RUSIA) (BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE JUDGE
Ravi
