The Bombay High Court quashed an order and a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, highlighting that the validity of such notices must be evaluated based on the legal framework existing on the date of issuance.
The petitioner, Rohan Nayan Shah, challenged the impugned order dated 18.07.2022, issued under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the subsequent notice issued under Section 148 of the Act on the same date. It was contended that these actions were unjust and not in accordance with the law.
Neha Anchlia, representing the petitioner, asserted that the petition is covered by the judgement in the New India Assurance case. She argued that the impugned order and notice should be quashed based on this precedent.
Akhileshwar Sharma, representing the respondents, agreed with the contention of the petitioner that the case falls under the purview of the cited judgement.
In the landmark judgement of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v/s Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3(2)(1), Mumbai & Ors., the court emphasised the necessity for the Income Tax Department to strictly adhere to the procedural requirements laid down in the Income Tax Act, particularly those related to the issuance of notices under Section 148.
It was noted that the validity of a notice under Section 148 must be evaluated based on the legal framework existing on the date of issuance. The court highlighted that any deviation from the procedures could render the notices and subsequent orders void.
The bench of justices K.R Shriram and Neela Gokhale quashed and set aside the impugned order issued under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the notice dated 18.07.2022, issued under Section 148 of the Act.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
