Gujarat High Court

Reassessment notices for Assessment Year 2015-16 issued after April 1, 2021, are time-barred and invalid.

Prabhatbhai Mahadevbhai Desai v. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle (2)(1)(1), Surat [R/Special Civil Application No. 1842 of 2023]

Gujarat High CourtJUDGMENT: no citation2 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The petitioner challenged a reassessment notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16.

Source reference: no citation

Originally, a notice under the old regime was issued on 30.06.2021, invoking the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation of Certain Provisions) Ordinance/Act, 2020 (TOLA) to extend the limitation period.

Source reference: para. 3-4

Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Ashish Agarwal, the Department treated the old notice as a show-cause notice under the new Section 148A(b) and subsequently issued a fresh Section 148 notice in July/August 2022.

Source reference: para. 5

The petitioner contended that for AY 2015-16, the notices were time-barred under the new legal framework.

Source reference: para. 6
02

Issues

1. Whether the reassessment notices issued for Assessment Year 2015-16 after 31.03.2021 are legally valid under the limitation periods prescribed by Section 149 of the Income Tax Act as amended by the Finance Act, 2021.

Source reference: para. 9

2. Whether the extension of time granted by TOLA can validate notices for AY 2015-16 where the three-year and six-year limitation periods do not align with the TOLA window.

Source reference: para. 9-10
03

Law Applied

The court primarily applied Section 149 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (as amended w.e.f. 01.04.2021), which governs the time limits for issuing reassessment notices.

Source reference: para. 8

It relied on the landmark Supreme Court precedent Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal (2024), which clarified the interplay between TOLA and the amended Income Tax provisions, specifically holding that for AY 2015-16, the Revenue’s power to issue notices expired because the relevant timelines did not fall within the "completion period" protected by TOLA.

Source reference: para. 9

The court also cited Deepak Steel and Power Ltd v. CBDT (2025), where the Revenue conceded that notices for AY 2015-16 issued after 01.04.2021 must be dropped.

Source reference: para. 10
04

Reasoning

The court reasoned that for AY 2015-16, the three-year limitation period expired on 31.03.2019 (prior to TOLA), and the six-year period expired on 31.03.2022.

Source reference: para. 9

Based on the Revenue's own concession recorded by the Supreme Court in Rajeev Bansal, notices for AY 2015-16 issued on or after 01.04.2021 do not fall within the protected window of TOLA for completion.

Source reference: para. 10

The court observed that since the impugned Section 148 notices were issued in mid-2022 (following the Ashish Agarwal procedure) and were based on an initial underlying notice issued after 01.04.2021, they are hit by the bar of limitation.

Source reference: para. 16

The court noted that multiple High Courts (Delhi, Punjab & Haryana, Rajasthan, Karnataka) and the Supreme Court in subsequent SLPs have consistently quashed notices for this specific assessment year on these grounds.

Source reference: para. 11-15
05

Holding

The High Court allowed the petition and quashed the impugned notice issued under Section 148 for AY 2015-16.

The court held that all reassessment notices for AY 2015-16 issued on or after 01.04.2021 are invalid as they are time-barred and cannot benefit from the TOLA extensions, following the binding precedent set in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal.

Source reference: para. 16-17

Rule made absolute.

Source reference: para. 18
Gujarat High Court

Original Court PDF

Prabhatbhai Mahadevbhai Desai v. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle (2)(1)(1), Surat [R/Special Civil Application No. 1842 of 2023]

Gujarat High Court · no citation

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment