SLP dismissed; HC held delay under 148A(b) to be computed from first notice, making it within sec. 149 time limit {Chandra Shekhar vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax 1 [2025] 179 taxmann.com 341 (SC)}
Facts
- The tax department issued a notice under Section 148A(b) of the Income‑tax Act, 1961 to the assessee on 28 March 2024.
- Assessee responded to that notice.
- After considering the reply, the department issued a further notice under Section 148 on 22 April 2024.
- The question arose whether the 22 April 2024 notice was within the time‐limit allowed under Section 149 (which governs the time‐bar for reopening assessments), because there was a delay between the first notice and the second.
Issue
- Does the time‐limit under Section 149 get counted from the first notice under Section 148A(b) (28 March), or from the actual notice under Section 148 (22 April)?
- Put differently Is the “delay” between the first and second notice relevant for the time‐bar? And was the second notice valid in time?
Facts:
- Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition (SLP) against the High Court’s order, thereby upholding the High Court’s view.
- Court held that the time‐limit under Section 149 must take into account the earlier notice under Section 148A(b). In other words, the clock for the time‐bar starts when the first relevant notice was issued.
- Since the department had issued the first notice on 28 March 2024 and the second on 22 April 2024, the reopening fell within the time‐limit.
So the notice under Section 148 was held to be valid and time‐bar was not breached
