9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (10) TMI 517 - HC - Income TaxValidity of re-assessment notice issued under the erstwhile section147/148 after 1.4.2001 without following the mandate of new section 148A - Validity of the re-assessment proceedings initiated against the individual petitioners, after 01.04.2021, having resort to the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as they existed, read with the provisions of Act No. 38 of 2020 and the notifications issued thereunder - issuance of notices under Section 148 of the Act and also with respect to completion of reassessment proceedings - Insertion of new section 148A - validity of the Explanation appended to clause (A)(a) of CBDT Notification No. 20 of 2021, dated 31.03.2021 and Explanation to clause (A)(b) of CBDT Notification No. 38 of 2021, dated 27.04.2021 - Ordinance, the Enabling Act and Sections 2 to 88 of the Finance Act 2021, as enforced w.e.f. 01.04.2021 - substitution of Sections 147, 148, 148A, 149, 151 151A - scope of amendment - pre-existing provisions of the Act, with reference to pending proceedings - scope of provisions of the Enabling Act or the Notifications issued - as submitted procedural amendments cannot recreate a non-existing substantive law - HELD THAT - 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, 2021. Additional Solicitor General of India may not be entirely correct in stating that no extension of time was granted beyond 30.06.2021. 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 Parliament. Here, it may also be clarified, Section 3(1) of the Enabling Act does not itself speak of reassessment proceeding or of Section 147 or Section 148 of the Act as it existed prior to 01.04.2021. It only provides a general relaxation of limitation granted on account of general hardship existing upon the spread of pandemic COVID -19. After enforcement of the Finance Act, 2021, it applies to the substituted provisions and not the pre-existing provisions. Reference to reassessment proceedings with respect to pre-existing and now substituted provisions of Sections 147 and 148 of the Act has been introduced only by the later Notifications issued under the Act. Therefore, the validity of those provisions is also required to be examined. We have concluded as above, that the provisions of Sections 147, 148, 148A, 149, 150 and 151 substituted the old/pre-existing provisions of the Act w.e.f. 01.04.2021 - 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 over reach the principal legislation. Unless harmonized as above, those Notifications would remain invalid. Unless specifically enabled under any law and unless that burden had been discharged by the respondents, we are unable to accept the further submission advanced by the learned Additional Solicitor General of India that practicality dictates that the reassessment proceedings be protected. Practicality, if any, may lead to legislation. Once the matter reaches Court, it is the legislation and its language, and the interpretation offered to that language as may primarily be decisive to govern the outcome of the proceeding. To read practicality into enacted law is dangerous. Also, it would involve legislation by the Court, an idea and exercise we carefully tread away from. Similarly, the mischief rule has limited application in the present case. Only in case of any doubt existing as to which of the two interpretations may apply or to clear a doubt as to the true interpretation of a provision, the Court may look at the mischief rule to find the correct law. However, where plain legislative action exists, as in the present case (whereunder the Parliament has substituted the old provisions regarding reassessment with new provisions w.e.f. 01.04.2021), the mischief rule has no application. As we see there is no conflict in the application and enforcement of the Enabling Act and the Finance Act, 2021. Juxtaposed, if the Finance Act, 2021 had not made the substitution to the reassessment procedure, the revenue authorities would have been within their rights to claim extension of time, under the Enabling Act. However, upon that sweeping amendment made the Parliament, by necessary implication or implied force, it limited the applicability of the Enabling Act and the power to grant time extensions thereunder, to only such reassessment proceedings as had been initiated till 31.03.2021. Consequently, the impugned Notifications have no applicability to the reassessment proceedings initiated from 01.04.2021 onwards. Upon the Finance Act 2021 enforced w.e.f. 1.4.2021 without any saving of the provisions substituted, there is no room to reach a conclusion as to conflict of laws. It was for the assessing authority to act according to the law as existed on and after 1.4.2021. If the rule of limitation permitted, it could initiate, reassessment proceedings in accordance with the new law, after making adequate compliance of the same. That not done, the reassessment proceedings initiated against the petitioners are without jurisdiction. According to us, it would be incorrect to look at the delegation legislation i.e. Notification dated 31.03.2021 issued under the Enabling Act, to interpret the principal legislation made by Parliament, being the Finance Act, 2021. A delegated legislation can never overreach any Act of the principal legislature. Second, it would be over simplistic to ignore the provisions of, either the Enabling Act or the Finance Act, 2021 and to read and interpret the provisions of Finance Act, 2021 as inoperative in view of the fact circumstances arising from the spread of the pandemic COVID-19. In absence of any specific clause in Finance Act, 2021, either to save the provisions of the Enabling Act or the Notifications issued thereunder, by no interpretative process can those Notifications be given an extended run of life, beyond 31 March 2020. They may also not infuse any life into a provision that stood obliterated from the statute with effect from 31.03.2021. Inasmuch as the Finance Act, 2021 does not enable the Central Government to issue any notification to reactivate the pre-existing law (which that principal legislature had substituted), the exercise made by the delegate/Central Government would be de hors any statutory basis. In absence of any express saving of the pre-existing laws, the presumption drawn in favour of that saving, is plainly impermissible. Also, no presumption exists that by Notification issued under the Enabling Act, the operation of the pre-existing provision of the Act had been extended and thereby provisions of Section 148A of the Act (introduced by Finance Act 2021) and other provisions had been deferred. All the writ petitions must succeed and are allowed. It is declared that the Ordinance, the Enabling Act and Sections 2 to 88 of the Finance Act 2021, as enforced w.e.f. 01.04.2021, are not conflicted. Insofar as the Explanation appended to Clause A(a), A(b), and the impugned Notifications dated 31.03.2021 and 27.04.2021 (respectively) are concerned, we declare that the said Explanations must be read, as applicable to reassessment proceedings as may have been in existence on 31.03.2021 i.e. before the substitution of Sections 147, 148, 148A, 149, 151 151A of the Act. Consequently, the reassessment notices in all the writ petitions are quashed. It is left open to the respective assessing authorities to initiate reassessment proceedings in accordance with the provisions of the Act as amended by Finance Act, 2021, after making all compliances, as required by law. Reassessment notice issued to the present petitioner is quashed.
Issues Involved:
1. Validity of re-assessment notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 after 01.04.2021. 2. Validity of the Explanation appended to clause (A)(a) of CBDT Notification No. 20 of 2021, dated 31.03.2021. 3. Validity of the Explanation to clause (A)(b) of CBDT Notification No. 38 of 2021, dated 27.04.2021. 4. Impact of the Finance Act, 2021 on re-assessment proceedings under the Income Tax Act, 1961. 5. Interpretation of the Enabling Act and its effect on the Finance Act, 2021. 6. The role of delegated legislation in the context of the Finance Act, 2021. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Validity of Re-assessment Notices Issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 after 01.04.2021: The court found that the re-assessment notices issued after 01.04.2021 were invalid. The Finance Act, 2021 substituted the old provisions of Sections 147, 148, 149, 151, and introduced Section 148A, effective from 01.04.2021. The court held that the old provisions were omitted and replaced, and in the absence of any saving clause, the new provisions must be applied. Therefore, any re-assessment notice issued under the old provisions after 01.04.2021 was without jurisdiction. 2. Validity of the Explanation Appended to Clause (A)(a) of CBDT Notification No. 20 of 2021, dated 31.03.2021: The court declared that the Explanation to Clause (A)(a) of Notification No. 20 of 2021 must be read as applicable to re-assessment proceedings that were in existence on 31.03.2021. The Explanation could not be applied to initiate new re-assessment proceedings under the old law after 01.04.2021. 3. Validity of the Explanation to Clause (A)(b) of CBDT Notification No. 38 of 2021, dated 27.04.2021: Similarly, the court held that the Explanation to Clause (A)(b) of Notification No. 38 of 2021 should be interpreted to apply only to re-assessment proceedings that were already in existence before 01.04.2021. The Explanation could not be used to justify the initiation of new re-assessment proceedings under the old law after the enforcement of the Finance Act, 2021. 4. Impact of the Finance Act, 2021 on Re-assessment Proceedings under the Income Tax Act, 1961: The court emphasized that the Finance Act, 2021, by substituting the old provisions with new ones effective from 01.04.2021, rendered the old provisions inapplicable for initiating new re-assessment proceedings. The new provisions introduced a different procedural framework, including Section 148A, which mandated specific steps before issuing a re-assessment notice. Therefore, any re-assessment proceedings initiated after 01.04.2021 must comply with the new provisions. 5. Interpretation of the Enabling Act and its Effect on the Finance Act, 2021: The court clarified that the Enabling Act, which extended time limits due to the COVID-19 pandemic, did not save the old provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961, beyond 31.03.2021. The Enabling Act was intended to extend timelines for existing proceedings, not to validate new proceedings under the old law after the new provisions came into force. The court held that the Enabling Act and the Finance Act, 2021, must be harmonized, with the latter taking precedence for re-assessment proceedings initiated after 01.04.2021. 6. The Role of Delegated Legislation in the Context of the Finance Act, 2021: The court ruled that delegated legislation, such as the Notifications issued under the Enabling Act, could not override or extend the applicability of the old provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961, beyond 31.03.2021. The Notifications could only extend timelines for proceedings already initiated under the old law before 01.04.2021. The court emphasized that the Finance Act, 2021, as principal legislation, took precedence, and any delegated legislation attempting to overreach it would be invalid. Conclusion: The court quashed the re-assessment notices issued to the petitioners after 01.04.2021, as they were issued under the old provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which were no longer applicable. The court left it open for the assessing authorities to initiate re-assessment proceedings in accordance with the new provisions introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, after making all necessary compliances as required by law.
|
