Orissa High Court
Nutan Bhusan Jena vs The Principal Commissioner Of on 6 May, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No. 11181 of 2022
Nutan Bhusan Jena .... Petitioner
Mr. Rudra Prasad Kar, Advocate
-versus-
The Principal Commissioner of
Income Tax, Bhubaneswar-1 and .... Opposite Parties
others
Mr. T.K. Satapathy, Senior Standing Counsel
for IT Department
CORAM:
THE CHIEF JUSTICE
JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK
ORDER
Order No. 06.05.2022
01. 1. The Court has been shown the Judgment dated 4th May 2022,
passed by the Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No.3005 of
2022 and batch (Union of India & others v. Ashish Agarwal),
where the issue taken up for consideration was the correctness of
the orders passed by the High Courts of Delhi, Rajasthan, Calcutta,
Madras and Bombay on the question of the validity of notices
issued by the Income Tax Department (Department) under Section
148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act) in light of the amendment
by the Finance Act 2021, which introduced the new amended
provisions i.e., Sections 147 to 151 with effect from 1st April,
2021.
2. On reading the entire Judgment, it becomes clear that the
Supreme Court only partly allowed the appeals of the Union of
India and made a distinction between notices issued by the
Department on or after 1st April, 2021 and those that have been
issued prior thereto. As regards the notices issued after 1st April
2021, the Supreme Court has in its operative portion held as under:
"11. The present order shall be applicable PAN
INDIA and all judgments and orders passed by
different High Courts on the issue and under
which similar notices which were issued after
01.04.2021 issued under section 148 of the Act
are set aside and shall be governed by the present
order and shall stand modified to the aforesaid
extent. The present order is passed in exercise of
powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of
India so as to avoid any further appeals by the
Revenue on the very issue by challenging similar
judgments and orders, with a view not to burden
this Court with approximately 9000 appeals. We
also observe that present order shall also govern
the pending writ petitions, pending before various
High Courts in which similar notices under
Section 148 of the Act issued after 01.04.2021 are
under challenge."
3. Consequently, the Supreme Court has in Para-12 ordered as
under"
"12. The impugned common judgments and
orders passed by the High Court of Allahabad and
the similar judgments and orders passed by
various High Courts, more particularly, the
respective judgments and orders passed by the
various High Courts particulars of which are
mentioned hereinabove, shall stand modified/
substituted to the aforesaid extent only."
4. In the present case, the notice under Section 148 of the Act
pertaining to the Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14 was issued on
30th March 2021, i.e., prior to 1st April 2021. Also, it was beyond
the period of six years after the expiry of the AY in question.
Consequently, both in light of the Judgment of the Supreme Court
in Union of India & others v. Ashish Agarwal (supra) and the
Order of this Court dated 24th January 2022 in W.P.(C) No.20919
of 2021 and batch of writ petitions in M/s. Ambika Iron and Steel
Pvt. Ltd. and others v. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax
and others, the impugned notice is hereby quashed and all the
subsequent orders and proceedings are also hereby quashed.
5. The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms.
(Dr. S. Muralidhar)
Chief Justice
(R.K. Pattanaik)
Judge
S. Behera
