Validity of Notices issued u/s 148 after 1st April

Table of the Contents

1. Introduction

2. Notification No. 20 of 2021 issued by CBDT was as under-

3. Notification No. 38 of 2021 issued by CBDT was as under-

4. Challenge to the notifications

5. The decision of the High Courts

6. SLP of the Revenue

7. The procedure to be followed

8. Defence available to the taxpayer

9. Conclusion

Checkout Taxmann's Law Relating to Reassessment which is a treatise on 'Reassessment under Income tax Act' containing each aspect of the law. The newly substituted provisions as per Finance Act 2022 have been incorporated appropriately. This book is not only characterised by its lucid explanations but also includes 2,500+ case laws and 170+ FAQs for the removal of doubts and to explain the issues further.

1. Introduction

Because of COVID during the period from January 2020 it became impossible for individuals as well as Government authorities to adhere to the statutory limits (provided u/s 149 for reopening the assessment) under Income Tax Act and also under other statutes. To overcome these difficulties the Government of India introduced the Relaxation Act, as an ordinance Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation of Certain Provisions) Ordinance, 2020 (TOLA in short). According to this Act the date of issuing notices and other compliances which were required to be done by 20th March, 2020 was extended to, 30th June, 2020. Sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Relaxation Ordinance, 2020 provided that any time limit in the specified Acts (which included Income Tax Act), which fell during the period from 20th March, 2020 to 29th June, 2020 or such other date after 29th June 2020 as the Central Government may by notification specify for completion or compliance of the action and where such completion and compliance had not been made within the time, then the time limit for such purpose notwithstanding anything contained in the specified Act would stand extended to 30th June, 2020 or such other date after 30th June, 2020 as the Central Government may by notification specify in this behalf.

The ordinance was replaced by Relaxation Act. Under section 3(1) thereof, the time limits specified in the specified Acts, which fell during the period from 20th March, 2020 to 31st December, 2020 or such other date after 31st December, 2020 as the Central Government may notify, were extended to 31st March, 2021 or such other date after 31st March, 2021 as the Central Government may by notification specify. In exercise of powers under sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Relaxation Act, the Government of India through the Central Board of Direct Taxes issued a Notification No. 20 of 2021 dated 31st March 2021 and extended, besides others, the time limit for issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act. This was followed by another Notification No. 38 of 2021, dated 27th April 2021 and later a Notification No. 74 of 2021, dated 25th June 2021, which extended the date of issuance of notice u/s 148 to 30-06-2021.

Thus, under Notification No. 20 of 2021, the time limit was extended to 30th April, 2021. Under Notification No. 38 of 2021, the time limit for issuing notice under Section 148 of the Act was extended to 30th June 2021.

2. Notification No. 20 of 2021 issued by CBDT was as under-

“SECTION 3 OF THE TAXATION AND OTHER LAWS (RELAXATION AND AMENDMENT OF CERTAIN PROVISIONS) ACT, 2020, READ WITH SECTIONS 139AA, 144C, 148, 149 AND 151 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 AND SECTION 168 OF THE FINANCE ACT, 2016 – RELAXATION OF CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF SPECIFIED ACT – EXTENSION OF DUE DATE FOR COMPLETION OF ACTION UNDER SPECIFIED ACTS

NOTIFICATION S.O. 1432(E) [NO. 20/2021/F. NO. 370142/35/2020-TPL], DATED 31-3-2021

In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 (38 of 2020) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), and in partial modification of the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance, (Department of Revenue) No. 93/2020 dated the 31st December, 2020, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, section 3, sub-section (ii), vide number S.O. 4805(E), dated the 31st December, 2020, the Central Government hereby specifies that,—

(A) where the specified Act is the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961) (hereinafter referred to as the Income-tax Act) and, —

(a) the completion of any action referred to in clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Act relates to passing of an order under sub-section (13) of section 144C or issuance of notice under section 148 as per time-limit specified in section 149 or sanction under section 151 of the Income-tax Act, —

(i) the 31st day of March, 2021 shall be the end date of the period during which the time-limit, specified in, or prescribed or notified under, the Income-tax Act falls for the completion of such action; and
(ii) the 30th day of April, 2021 shall be the end date to which the time-limit for the completion of such action shall stand extended.

Explanation.— For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that for the purposes of issuance of notice under section 148 as per time-limit specified in section 149 or sanction under section 151 of the Income-tax Act, under this sub-clause, the provisions of section 148, section 149 and section 151 of the Income-tax Act, as the case may be, as they stood as on the 31st day of March 2021, before the commencement of the Finance Act, 2021, shall apply.
(b) the compliance of any action referred to in clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 3 of the said Act relates to intimation of Aadhaar number to the prescribed authority under sub-section (2) of section 139AA of the Income-tax Act, the time-limit for compliance of such action shall stand extended to the 30th day of June, 2021.

(B) where the specified Act is the Chapter VIII of the Finance Act, 2016 (28 of 2016) (hereinafter referred to as the Finance Act) and the completion of any action referred to in clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 3 of the said Act relates to sending an intimation under sub-section (1) of section 168 of the Finance Act, —

(i) the 31st day of March, 2021 shall be the end date of the period during which the time-limit, specified in, or prescribed or notified under, the Finance Act falls for the completion of such action; and
(ii) the 30th day of April, 2021 shall be the end date to which the time-limit for the completion of such action shall stand extended.”

3. Notification No. 38 of 2021 issued by CBDT was as under-

“SECTION 3 OF THE TAXATION AND OTHER LAWS (RELAXATION AND AMENDMENT OF CERTAIN PROVISIONS) ACT, 2020 – RELAXATION OF CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF SPECIFIED ACT – EXTENSION OF DUE DATE FOR COMPLETION OF ACTION UNDER SPECIFIED ACTS

NOTIFICATION S.O. 1703 (E) [NO. 38/2021/F. NO. 370142/35/2020-TPL], DATED 27-4-2021

In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 (38 of 2020) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), and in partial modification of the notifications of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance, (Department of Revenue) No. 93/2020 dated the 31st December, 2020, No. 10/2021 dated the 27th February, 2021 and No. 20/2021 dated the 31st March, 2021, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part-II, section 3, sub-section (ii), vide number S.O. 4805(E), dated the 31st December, 2020, vide number S.O. 966(E) dated the 27th February, 2021 and vide number S.O. 1432(E) dated the 31st March, 2021, respectively (hereinafter referred to as the said notifications), the Central Government hereby specifies for the purpose of sub-section (1) of section 3 of the said Act that, —

(A) where the specified Act is the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961) (hereinafter referred to as the Income-tax Act) and, —

(a) the completion of any action, referred to in clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 3 of the said Act, relates to passing of any order for assessment or reassessment under the Income-tax Act, and the time limit for completion of such action under section 153 or section 153B thereof, expires on the 30th day of April, 2021 due to its extension by the said notifications, such time-limit shall further stand extended to the 30th day of June, 2021;
(b) the completion of any action, referred to in clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 3 of the said Act, relates to passing of an order under sub-section (13) of section 144C of the Income-tax Act or issuance of notice under section 148 as per time-limit specified in section 149 or sanction under section 151 of the Income-tax Act, and the time limit for completion of such action expires on the 30th day of April, 2021 due to its extension by the said notifications, such time limit shall further stand extended to the 30th day of June, 2021.

Explanation.— For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that for the purposes of issuance of notice under section 148 as per time-limit specified in section 149 or sanction under section 151 of the Income-tax Act, under this sub-clause, the provisions of section 148, section 149 and section 151 of the Income-tax Act, as the case may be, as they stood as on the 31st day of March 2021, before the commencement of the Finance Act, 2021, shall apply.

(B) where the specified Act is the Chapter VIII of the Finance Act, 2016 (28 of 2016) (hereinafter referred to as the Finance Act) and the completion of any action, referred to in clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 3 of the said Act, relates to sending an intimation under sub-section (1) of section 168 of the Finance Act, and the time-limit for completion of such action expires on the 30th day of April, 2021 due to its extension by the said notifications, such time-limit shall further stand extended to the 30th day of June, 2021.”

4. Challenge to the notifications

These notifications were challenged before various High Courts on the following common grounds-

(i) By substitution of new provisions of reassessment, w.e.f. 01-04-2021 the old provisions were omitted from the statute book. The substitution omits and thus, obliterates the pre-existing provisions.
(ii) There is no saving clause shown to exist either under the ordinance or the Enabling Act or the Finance Act 2021, to save the old provisions even after 31-03-2021.
(iii) The old law would prevail only in respect of proceedings initiated before 01-04-2021.
(iv) The delegated action performed under the Enabling Act cannot itself create an overriding effect in favour of the Enabling Act.
(v) The Enabling Act is an enactment to extend timelines only. It does not save the old law.
(vi) The Enabling Act neither creates any jurisdiction nor confers validity on any reassessment proceedings instituted under the unamended law, after the enforcement of the Finance Act, 2021.
(vii) Finance Act, 2021 changed the substantive and procedural law governing the reassessment proceedings by way of introduction, inter alia, of section 148A, the legislative field stood occupied leaving the delegatee with no room to manipulate the law except where proceedings are initiated before 01-04-2021.
(viii) The delegated legislation can never defeat the principal legislation.
(ix) By way of explanation, the subordinate legislature cannot revive the statutory provisions which had lapsed. The explanations contained in the notifications dated 31-3-2021 and 27-4-2021 are thus ultra vires the powers of the subordinate legislation and therefore unconstitutional.

Therefore,

i. After insertion of new provisions of reassessment w.e.f 01-04-2021, the notice u/s 148 must be issued in accordance with the amended provisions.
ii. Insertion of new provisions will have the effect of repealing the old provisions.
iii. The Relaxation Act merely authorised the Government to extend the time-limits contained in the specified Act and that did not include power to issue any explanation or clarification.
iv. By way of explanation, the subordinate legislature sought to revive the statutory provisions which had lapsed. Therefore, the explanations contained in notification dated 31-03-2021 and 27-04-2021 are ultra vires the powers of the subordinate legislation.

5. The decision of the High Courts

It was commonly held by various courts that-

(i) Where the legislature chooses to put in place another or, replace an existing provision of law. It involves simultaneous omission and re-enactment. By its very nature, once a new provision has been put in place of a pre-existing provision, the earlier provision cannot survive, except for things done or already undertaken to be done or things expressly saved to be done¹.
(ii) In absence of any saving clause, to save the pre-existing (and now substituted) provisions, the revenue authorities could only initiate reassessment proceeding on or after 01.04.2021, in accordance with the substituted law and not the pre-existing laws².
(iii) In the Enabling Act and the Finance Act, 2021, there is absence, both of any express provision in itself or to delegate the function – to save applicability of the provisions of section 147, 148, 149 or 151 of the Act, as they existed up to 31.03.2021³.
(iv) No jurisdiction had been assumed by the assessing authority against the assessee, under the unamended law (i.e., no initiation of reassessment proceedings was undertaken prior to 01-04-2021). Hence, no time extension could ever be made under section 3(1) of the Enabling Act, read with the Notifications issued thereunder⁴.
(v) Thus, the Enabling Act only protected certain proceedings that may have become time barred on 20.03.2021, upto the date 30.06.2021. Correspondingly, by delegated legislation incorporated by the Central Government, it may extend that time limit. That time-limit alone stood extended upto 30 June, 2021⁵.
(vi) Vide Notification No. 3814, dated 17.09.2021, issued under section 3(1) of the Enabling Act, further extension of time has been granted till 31.03.2022. In absence of any specific delegation made, to allow the delegate of the Parliament, to indefinitely extend such limitation, would be to allow the validity of an enacted law i.e. the Finance Act, 2021 to be defeated by a purely colourable exercise of power, by the delegate of the Parliament⁶.
(vii) In absence of any proceeding of reassessment having been initiated prior to the date 01.04.2021, it is the amended law alone that would apply. We do not see how the delegate i.e. Central Government or the CBDT could have issued the Notifications, plainly to overreach the principal legislation⁷.
(viii) The Memorandum to the Finance Bill, 2021 clarifies that sections 2 to 88 which included the substituted sections 147 to 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 will take effect from 1st April, 2021. There is no power with the Executive/Revenue to defer/postpone the implementation of sections 2 to 88 of the Finance Act, 2021 which includes the substituted sections 147 to 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961⁸.
(ix) It is settled law that the law prevailing on the date of issuance of the notice under section 148 has to be applied⁹.
(x) Had the intention of the Legislature been to keep the erstwhile provisions alive, it would have introduced the new provisions with effect from 1st July, 2021, which has not been done. Accordingly, the notices relating to any assessment year issued under section 148 on or after 1st April, 2021 have to comply with the provisions of sections 147, 148, 148A, 149 and 151 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 as specifically substituted by the Finance Act, 2021 with effect from 1st April, 2021¹⁰.
(xi) Had the intention of the Legislature been to keep the erstwhile provisions alive, it would have introduced the new provisions with effect from 1st July, 2021, which has not been done. Accordingly, the notices relating to any assessment year issued under section¹¹.
(xii) The substitution of a provision results in repeal of the earlier provision and its replacement by the new provision¹².
(xiii) In plain terms under sub- section (1) of section 3 of the Relaxation Act, 2020 the Government of India was authorized to extend the time limits by issuing notifications in this regard. Issuing any explanation touching the provisions of the Income-tax Act was not part of this delegation at all. The CBDT while issuing the notifications dated 31.03.2021 and 27.04.2021 when introduced an explanation which is provided by way of clarification that for the purposes of issuance of notice under section 148 as per the time limits specified in section 149 or 151, the provisions as they stood as on 31.03.2021 before commencement of the Finance Act, 2021 shall apply, plainly exceeded its jurisdiction as a subordinate legislation¹³.
(xiv) Once legislature has exercised its powers of legislation by enacting Finance Act, 2021, then any action like issuance of impugned notifications contrary to said legislation taken by any other agency/wing of the Government is bad in law as the same would fall foul of the doctrine of occupied filed as held by the Apex Court in A.B. Kirshna v. State of Karnataka¹⁴.
(xv) Essential legislative functions and extension of limitation period cannot be delegated and if limitation period is altered by a subordinate authority, then the delegation is excessive and the doctrine of ultra vires can be invoked¹⁵.
(xvi) The general rule of law states that when there is a conflict between two statutes, the one that is more recent prevails and since the Finance Act was more recent compared to the Relaxation Act, the provisions of Finance Act would prevail over the provisions made in the Relaxation Act¹⁶.
(xvii) The old/unamended provisions of sections 148 to 151 cease to have legal effect after 31st March, 2021 and the substituted provisions of sections 148 to 151 have binding force from 1st April, 2021. In the absence of a savings clause there is no legal device by which a repealed set of provisions can be applied and a set of provisions on the statute book¹⁷.
(xviii) Hence, notices issued under section 148 of the Act after 1st April, 2021 must comply with the amended provisions of law and cannot be sustained on the basis of the erstwhile provision¹⁸.

Thus, notices issued after 01-04-2021 without following the procedure laid down u/s 148A were quashed. This view was taken by several High Courts¹⁹.

However, Hon’ble Chhattisgarh High Court has held in several cases²⁰ that CBDT can extend the date of issue of notice u/s 148 through the notifications²¹ and therefore, notices issued u/s 148(1) on or after 01-04-2021 in respect of cases pertaining to reopening of assessment under old law are valid. This view is distinguished and not followed by other High Courts as above.

6. SLP of the Revenue

Against the orders of various High Courts quashing the issuance after 01-04-2021, of notices u/s 148 under old law, the Revenue filed SLP before Hon’ble Apex Court. It was finally heard on 19-04-2022, SLP was admitted, and order was pronounced on 04-05-2022²² The observations and ruling by Hon’ble Apex Court were as under-

(i) The impugned section 148 notices issued to the respective assessees which were issued under unamended section 148 of the IT Act, which were the subject matter of writ petitions before the various respective High Courts shall be deemed to have been issued under section 148A of the IT Act as substituted by the Finance Act, 2021 and construed or treated to be show cause notices in terms of section 148A(b). The assessing officer shall, within thirty days from today provide to the respective assessees information and material relied upon by the Revenue, so that the assessees can reply to the show cause notices within two weeks thereafter;
(ii) The requirement of conducting any enquiry, if required, with the prior approval of specified authority under section 148A(a) is hereby dispensed with as a onetime measure vis-à-vis those notices which have been issued under section 148 of the unamended Act from 01.04.2021 till date, including those which have been quashed by the High Courts.
Even otherwise as observed hereinabove holding any enquiry with the prior approval of specified authority is not mandatory but it is for the concerned Assessing Officers to hold any enquiry, if required;
(iii) The assessing officers shall thereafter pass orders in terms of section 148A(d) in respect of each of the concerned assessees; Thereafter following the procedure as required under section 148A may issue notice under section 148 (as substituted);
(iv) All defences which may be available to the assesses including those available under section 149 of the IT Act and all rights and contentions which may be available to the concerned assessees and Revenue under the Finance Act, 2021 and in law shall continue to be available.
(v) The present order shall substitute/modify respective judgments and orders passed by the respective High Courts quashing the similar notices issued under unamended section 148 of the IT Act irrespective of whether they have been assailed before this Court or not.

7. The procedure to be followed

In view of the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court against the order of various High Courts quashing the reassessment notices, the notices so issued under old law, for reopening the assessment are revived and are deemed to be notices under new law. The possible procedure to be followed after this judgement may be as under-

(i) Notice issued u/s 148 during the period from 01-04-2021 to 30-06-2021 under old law should be treated as a notice issued u/s 148A(b) issued under new law.
(ii) The necessity of inquiries u/s 148A(a) is dispensed with as it is not mandatory under new law. It is only at the discretion of the AO. The dispensing of inquiries is one time measure.
(iii) The AO shall provide to the assessee within 30 days of this judgment, reasons recorded, and material relied upon for issue of notice u/s 148. They should be treated as contents of the notice u/s 148A(b).
(iv) The assessee should file objections/replies within 2 weeks thereafter. It should be treated as reply of the assessee u/s 148A(c).
(v) The AO should dispose off the objections through a speaking order. Such disposal should be treated as order u/s 148A(d).
(vi) The AO shall issue fresh notice u/s 148 (substituted notice) enclosing therewith the order u/s 148A(d).
(vii) Where in the order disposing off the objections, it is held that it a fit case to issue notice u/s 148, the assessee is required to file the return of income as per notice u/s 148 already issued.
(viii) The assessee would be entitled to avail all the defences, rights and contentions available to him under new law.

8. Defence available to the taxpayer

(i) The limitation contained u/s 149(1) under new law is for issue of notice u/s 148 and not for issue of notice u/s 148A(b). Since after completing the procedure contained in section 148A, notice u/s 148 could be issued only during FYr 2022-23, the AO can reopen the assessment within the limitation of section 149(1)(a) for the AYrs 2019-20 and 2020-21. AYrs 2021-22 and 2022-23 are not in reckoning because action u/s 148 under old law taken during 01-04-2021 to 30-06-2021 was deemed to be taken in the FYr 2020-21. The AYrs for which notice could be issued during FYr 2020-21 would be for the AYr 2020-21 or earlier years and not for AYrs 2021-22 and 2022-23.
(ii) Where notice u/s 148 is issued during FYr 2022-23, under the limitation of section 149(1)(b) (new law), the AYrs covered would be 2018-19, 2017-18 and 2016-17.
(iii) AYr 2014-15: AYr 2014-15 sought to be reopened during FYr 2021-22 under old law (under an extended limitation due to notifications), could not be reopened by issuing notice u/s 148A/148 under new law during FYr 2021-22 because reopening under limitation of section 149(1)(b) during FYr 2021-22 could be done only upto AYr 2015-16.
(iv) AYr 2015-16: The sustainability of reopening of AYr 2015-16 by issuing notice u/s 148A during FYr 2021-22 and issuing notice u/s 148 during FYr 2022-23 falls into doubtful area. Even though Hon’ble Supreme Court has directed to treat notice u/s 148 under old law as notice u/s 148A under new law, the limitation contained in third and fourth proviso to section 149(1)(b) has to be considered.
As per third proviso, for counting limitation u/s 149(1)(b), the time or extended time allowed to the assessee as per show cause notice u/s 148A(b) or the period during which the proceedings u/s 148A is stayed by an order or injunction of any court shall be excluded. Even though various High Courts had stayed the proceedings u/s 148 initiated under old law, and Hon’ble Supreme Court has deemed the notice u/s 148 under old law as notice u/s 148A under new law, it is possible to interpret that stay by the Courts was to the notice u/s 148A and therefore, such period should be excluded from counting limitation u/s 149(1)(b) under new law. Therefore, the period of litigation from the stage of issue of notice u/s 148 under old law to the stage of converting such notice as notice u/s 148A under new law may have to be excluded from limitation.
If such period of litigation is excluded, the issue of order u/s 148A(d) and notice u/s 148 for the AY 2015-16 under new law may be held as within limitation.
As per fourth proviso, to section 149(1), if after excluding the period provided in the third proviso the time available to the AO for issue of order u/s 148A(d) is less than 7 days then such period shall be extended to 7 days.
Therefore, one has to work out period of stay/injunction in each case separately to find out whether passing of order u/s 148A(d) for the AYr 2015-16 was within limitation and whether notice issued during FYr 2022-23 u/s 148 under new law can be deemed to be a notice u/s 148 issued during FYr 2021-22 if such period of litigation is excluded.
(v) Where period of litigation from the date of issue of notice u/s 148 under old law during FYr 2021-22 till conversion of such notice into notice u/s 148A under new law is not excluded from the limitation or excluded period is so short that limitation for issue of notice u/s 148 under new law for AYr 2015-16 is expired, reopening for AYr 2015-16 cannot be done.
(vi) Thus, reopening which is sought under old law could survive under new law for the AYrs 2016-17 to 2020-21 and for AY 2015-16 in specific cases.
(vii) It is possible to argue that as notice issued u/s 148 during FYr 2022-23 under new law is deemed to be notice issued u/s 148 during FYr 2021-22 under new law (because of exclusion of period of litigation for counting limitation), the provisions of section 149(1)(b) as it existed during FYr 2021-22 will be applicable.
(viii) The reasons recorded for issue of notice u/s 148 under old law will form the basis of information for issue of notice u/s 148A and consequential notice u/s 148. These reasons must satisfy the conditions laid down u/s 149(1)(b) as it existed during FYr 2021-22 for the AYrs 2015-16 to 2018-19.
(ix) Where notice u/s 148 issued during FYr 2022-23 under new law is deemed to be a notice u/s 148 under new law during FYr 2021-22 (because of exclusion of period of litigation), the reopening of the assessment for AYrs 2015-16 to 2017-18 will survive only when conditions laid down u/s 149(1)(b) as per Finance Act, 2021 about escaped income represented in the form of asset, exceeding Rs. 50 lakhs and reflected from the books of account, documents or evidence are satisfied. No aggregation provided in section 149(1A) will be permissible for notices u/s 148 deemed to be issued in FYr. 2021-22.
(x) Where notice u/s 148 issued during FYr 2022-23 under new law is not deemed to be a notice u/s 148 under new law during FYr 2021-22, the reopening of the assessment for AYr 2015-16, will not survive and reopening of AYrs 2016-17 to 2018-19 will survive only when conditions laid down u/s 149(1)(b), read with section 149(1A) as per Finance Act, 2022 about escaped income represented in the form of asset/entry/expenditure, exceeding Rs. 50 lakhs and reflected from the books of account, documents or evidence are satisfied.
(xi) Reasons recorded before issue of notice u/s 148 under old law will partake the character of notice u/s 148A(b), they will have to satisfy the conditions u/s 149(1)(b). If the reasons do not satisfy the condition laid down u/s 149(1)(b), the reopening is unlikely to survive for the AYrs 2015-16 to 2018-19.
(xii) The AO may have an option to drop the proceedings u/s 148 initiated in FYr 2021-22 under old law and freshly initiate proceeding u/s 148A/148 under new law so as to fully comply with conditions u/s 149(1)(b).
(xiii) Approval as per section 151 needed to be examined.

9. Conclusion

Each case has to be examined independently to evaluate the validity of notice u/s 148 issued under old law during the period from 01-04-2021 to 30-06-2021, as deemed notice u/s 148A(b) under new law and to what extent defence provided u/s 149(1)(b), whether as per Finance Act, 2021 or as per Finance Act, 2022, is available to the assessee. Under old law assessment for AYr 2014-15 could have been reopened upto 31-03-2021, but under new law it is not possible to reopen that AYr during FYr 2021-22. All the notices issued for the AYr 2014-15 are unlikely to be sustained. Sustainability of reopening for the AYr 2015-16 will depend upon how much time one can exclude by invoking third proviso and fourth proviso to section 149(1).

1. Ashok Kumar Agarwal v. UOI [2021] 131 taxmann.com 22 (Allahabad)
2. Ashok Kumar Agarwal v. UOI [2021] 131 taxmann.com 22 (Allahabad)
3. Ashok Kumar Agarwal v. UOI [2021] 131 taxmann.com 22 (Allahabad)
4. Ashok Kumar Agarwal v. UOI [2021] 131 taxmann.com 22 (Allahabad)
5. Ashok Kumar Agarwal v. UOI [2021] 131 taxmann.com 22 (Allahabad)
6. Ashok Kumar Agarwal v. UOI [2021] 131 taxmann.com 22 (Allahabad)
7. Ashok Kumar Agarwal v. UOI [2021] 131 taxmann.com 22 (Allahabad)
8. Mon Mohan Kohli v. ACIT [2021] 133 taxmann.com 166 (Delhi)
9. Mon Mohan Kohli v. ACIT [2021] 133 taxmann.com 166 (Delhi)
10. Sudesh Taneja v. ITO [2022] 135 taxmann.com 5 (Rajasthan)
11. Sudesh Taneja v. ITO [2022] 135 taxmann.com 5 (Rajasthan)
12. Sudesh Taneja v. ITO [2022] 135 taxmann.com 5 (Rajasthan)
13. Sudesh Taneja v. ITO [2022] 135 taxmann.com 5 (Rajasthan)
14. Tata Communications Transformation Services Limited v. ACIT, [WP NO.1334 OF 2021, dated 28-03-2022]
15. Tata Communications Transformation Services Limited v. ACIT, WP NO.1334 OF 2021 dated 28-03-2022
16. Tata Communications Transformation Services Limited v. ACIT, WP NO.1334 OF 2021 dated 28-03-2022
17. Tata Communications Transformation Services Limited v. ACIT, WP NO.1334 OF 2021 dated 28-03-2022
18. Tata Communications Transformation Services Limited v. ACIT WRIT PETITION NO. 1334 OF 2021 dated 28-03-2022
19. Mon Mohan Kohli v. ACIT [2021] 133 taxmann.com 166 (Delhi)
Ashok Kumar Agarwal v. UOI [2021] 131 taxmann.com 22 (Allahabad)
Bpip Infra (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [2021] 133 taxmann.com 48 (Rajasthan)
Manoj Jain v. UOI [2022] 134 taxmann.com 173 (Calcutta)
Bagaria Properties and Investment (P.) Ltd. v. UOI [2022] 134 taxmann.com 196 (Calcutta) Kandoi Metal Powders Manufacturing Company (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT [2022] 135 taxmann.com 306 (Rajasthan)
Dharmendra Gupta (Huf) v. ITO [2022] 135 taxmann.com 219 (Rajasthan)
Vellore Institute of Technology v. CBDT [2022] 135 taxmann.com 285 (Madras)
Sudesh Taneja v. ITO [2022] 135 taxmann.com 5 (Rajasthan)
20. Anant Rice Industries v. UOI [2021] 130 taxmann.com 132 (Chhattisgarh)
Sanjay Agrawal v. PCIT [2021] 133 taxmann.com 439 (Chhattisgarh)
Ashok Kumar Agrawal v. UOI [2021] 133 taxmann.com 14 (Chhattisgarh)
Shri Labtund Infrastructure (P.) Ltd. v. PCIT [2021] 133 taxmann.com 116 (Chhattisgarh) Prashant Sharma v. UOI [2021] 131 taxmann.com 78 (Chhattisgarh)
Palak Khatuja v. UOI [2021] 130 taxmann.com 44 (Chhattisgarh)
Guruteg Bahadur Rice Mill A Partnership Firm v. ACIT [2021] 130 taxmann.com 154 (Chhattisgarh)
21. Notification No. 20/2021, dated 31-3-2021 and Notification No. 38/2021, dated 27-4-2021
22. UOI v Ashish Agarwal [2022] 138 taxmann.com 64