Nimit Builders Private Limited (As Successor In The Interest Of Jk Jeet Clothes Private Limited And v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax & ORS.
$~53 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6861/2023 & CM APPL. 26807/2023 (Stay) NIMIT BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR
IN THE INTEREST OF JK JEET CLOTHES PRIVATE
LIMITED AND VERMA PROPTECH PRIVATE LIMITED) .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Vaibhav Kulkarni and Mr.
Aditya Bali, Advs.
versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ORS.
.....Respondents Through:
Mr. Gaurav Gupta, SSC along with Mr. Shivendra Singh and Mr. Yojit Pareek, JSCs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR
O R D E R
% 10.03.2025 1.
The instant writ petition had been preferred assailing the reassessment action initiated by the respondent pertaining to Assessment Year ['AY'] 2014-15. We take note of the principal challenge which now remains and pertains to the issue of surviving period.
2.
The petitioner, in order to buttress its claim of the proceedings being time barred, has placed for our consideration the following chart:
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
SUMMARY CHART C. Key Facts:
S. No PARTICULARS DATE Relevant Pg./ Ann No. of Writ Petition 1.
Notice issued under section 148 (old regime) 26.06.2021 85-92/ 'A'
2.
Letter communicating information pursuant to SC decision in Ashish Agarwal - reply to be filed by 10.06.2022 18.05.2022 08.06.2022 3.
Reply filed by Petitioner 09.06.2022 209-331/ 'G'
4.
Order u/s 148A(d) 28.07.2022 93-115/ 'B'
5.
Notice issued u/s 148 - Sanction obtained from PCCIT 27.07.2022 116-118/ 'C'
D. COMPUTATION OF LIMITATION AS PER DECISION OF UOI VS. RAJEEV BANSAL:
S. No.
SC Paras
13. Assessment Year 2014-15
14. Period of limitation u/s 149 [3 years or 6 years] 6 years
15. Original Period of limitation u/s 149 31.03.2021
16. Extended period of limitation as per IT Act read with TOLA 30.06.2021 Paras 65-69
17. Sanction to be obtained u/s 151 till 30.06.2021 [within 3 years] PCCIT
18. Date of original notice u/s 148 - deemed SCN u/s 148A(b) 26.06.2021
19. Time surviving from date of issuance of deemed SCN till expiry of period as extended by TOLA [from 26.06.2021 till 30.06.2021] 4 days Paras 109-113
20. Extended to 7 days as per proviso to section 149 7 days
21. Period of deemed stay to be excluded as per 3rd proviso to section 149 [Date of Original 148 till date allowed to file reply to assessee] 26.06.2021 to 10.06.2022 Paras 105-107
22. Last date for issuing notice u/s 148 [i.e., 10.06.2022 + 7 days] 17.06.2022 Para 77
23. Actual date of issuance of notice u/s 148 28.07.2022
24. Notice u/s 148 issued under new regime beyond the period of 6 years which expired on 17.06.2022. Thus, time barred- invalid Para The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
3.
The said question would have to be necessarily examined by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer bearing in mind the judgment of the Supreme Court in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal [2024 SCC OnLine SC 2693] as well as of this Court in Ram Balram Buildhome Pvt. Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer & Anr. [2025 SCC OnLine Del 481].
4.
Dealing with identical issues, we had disposed of a batch of writ petitions by our judgment rendered in Kanwaljeet Kaur vs. Commissioner of Income Tax [2025 SCC OnLine Del 605] in the following terms:
"27. We accordingly dispose of this batch of writ petitions by directing the concerned AOs to evaluate the individual SCNs' under Section 148 of the Act bearing in mind our judgments in T.K.S. Builders, Abhinav Jindal and Naveen Kumar Gupta. These decisions have conclusively settled issues pertaining to the accordal of sanction under Section 151 as well as the authority of the jurisdictional AO to commence and undertake reassessment. Those decisions also lay at rest the challenge which the writ petitioners had raised that an AO is bound to adhere to the procedure prescribed by Section 153C in cases emanating from a search.
28. A similar exercise would have to be undertaken to examine the issue of surviving period in respect of each individual noticee under Section 148 and which would necessarily be guided by the judgments of Rajeev Bansal and Ram Balram.
29. The concerned AOs shall consequently pass a reasoned and speaking order dealing with the impact of the judgments referred to above upon the impugned reassessment notices and in the manner indicated in paras 27 and 28 of this order. That decision shall thus render a finding on whether the impugned reassessment notices would survive or be liable to be recalled. It shall be open to the writ petitioners to assail any adverse orders that may come to be passed pursuant to the above in accordance with law." The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
5.
Consequently, and in light of the above, we dispose of the writ petition on terms identical to those provided in paragraphs 27 to 29 of Kanwaljeet Kaur.
YASHWANT VARMA, J HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J MARCH 10, 2025/RW The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.