Reassessment Quashed as AO Failed to Follow Mandatory Section 148A Procedure Post-Amendment.

Issue

Whether reassessment notices issued under Section 148 are legally valid if the Assessing Officer fails to comply with the mandatory pre-notice procedures under Section 148A (such as providing information and affording an opportunity to object), as required by law.

Facts

The Assessing Authority initiated reassessment proceedings for the Assessment Years 2021-22 and 2023-24 by issuing notices under Section 148.
These notices were issued after the amendment to Section 148A by the Finance Act No. 2 of 2024 (effective September 1, 2024), which governs the pre-notice procedure.
The assessees challenged these notices via writ petitions.
The primary ground for the challenge was that the Assessing Authority had not afforded them an opportunity to object as required under Section 148A.
Specifically, the authority had not confronted the assessees with the information being relied upon and had not given them a chance to file objections to the proposed reassessment.

Decision

The High Court allowed the writ petitions and quashed the impugned notices.
It held that the failure to follow the mandatory procedure under Section 148A vitiates the entire reassessment proceeding.
The Assessing Officer was directed to furnish the information (which was the basis for the reopening) to the assessees.
The assessees were to be given an opportunity to file their objections to the proposed reopening.
The department is at liberty to proceed with the reassessment only after these procedural steps are completed in accordance with the law.

Key Takeaways

Section 148A is Mandatory: The procedure prescribed under Section 148A (conducting an inquiry, providing the taxpayer with the information, and giving an opportunity to be heard) is a mandatory jurisdictional requirement.
No Notice Without Opportunity: An Assessing Officer cannot issue a valid reassessment notice under Section 148 without first strictly complying with the steps laid out in Section 148A.
Violation of Natural Justice: Bypassing this procedure is a clear violation of the principles of natural justice, as the taxpayer is denied the right to know the basis of the allegation and to file an objection.
Invalid Proceedings: A notice issued without following the Section 148A procedure is invalid and will be quashed by the courts.

HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD

Arjun Sahu

Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax

Saumitra Dayal Singh and INDRAJEET SHUKLA, JJ.

WRIT TAX Nos. 3702 to 3705 of 2025

OCTOBER 8, 2025

Mayank Chandra and Surya Pratap Singh for the Petitioner. Gaurav Mahajan, Krishna Agarawal and Shalini Goel for the Respondent.

ORDER

1. Heard Shri Nitin Kanwar, learned counsel along with Shri Surya Pratap Singh, learned counsel for petitioners, Ms. Shalini Goel, learned counsel and Shri Dhananjay Awasthi, learned counsel for revenue.

2. Present writ petitions have been filed to assail the re-assessment proceedings initiated against the petitioners. Details of the same are disclosed hereinbelow:

S.I.No	Writ Number	Party Name	Assessment Year	Date of Notice
1	3702 of 2025	Arjun Sahu	2023-2024	23.03.2025
2	3703 of 2025	Syed Quamer Abbas Zaidy	2023-2024	20.03.2025
3	3704 of 2025	Shashi Kiran	2021-2022	27.03.2025
4	3705 of 2025	Nikhil Nirwal	2023-2024	25.03.2025

3. Common submissions have been advanced. Accordingly all four writ petitions are being disposed of by this order.

4. Submission is, the re-assessment notices have been issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 after the amendment to Section 148-A made by the Finance Act No. 2 of 2024, w.e.f. 01.09.2024. Therefore, the obligation to grant opportunity to the individual petitioners’ under that provision of law was mandatory, before re-assessment proceedings may have been initiated under Section 148 of the said Act.

5. As a fact, it has been submitted there is absolutely no material against any of the petitioners as may indicate to their respective Assessing Authority-that any income has escaped assessment, at their hands. No material, relevant to the present petitioners, was discovered in any of the search proceedings. Therefore, the re-assessment proceedings are without jurisdiction.

6. In continuation, it has been submitted, to the extent the petitioners have not been confronted with the adverse material and to the extent they have not been granted any opportunity to explain the correct facts by objecting to the proposed assumption of jurisdiction of re-assessment, there is no remedy available to the petitioners but to approach this Court.

7. On the other hand learned counsel for revenue have vehemently urged that the provisions of Section 148-A, as amended by Finance Act No.2 of 2024, do not apply to cases of search that were carried out before 01.09.2024. To the extent it cannot be disputed that the search giving rise to the impugned re-assessment proceedings (against the petitioners), were completed before 01.09.2024, the Assessing Authority is not obligated or required by law to give any opportunity to raise objections to assumption of jurisdiction to re-assess them. Once the petitioners filed their return and participated in the proceedings, they will have ample opportunity, to dispute the assessment being proposed.

8. Having heard learned counsel for parties and having perused the records, it appears that the objection being raised by the revenue is hyper technical to be adjudicated, at this stage. Even if the objection being raised by the revenue were to be sustained, it may never be denied prior to the introduction of statutory law under Section 148-A there existed binding precedential law under the GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO (SC)/ 2003 259 ITR page 19 SC wherein it was observed as below:

“5. We see no justifiable reason to interfere with the order under challenge. However, we clarify that when a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act is issued, the proper course of action for the noticee is to file return and if he so desires, to seek reasons for issuing notices. The assessing officer is bound to furnish reasons within a reasonable time. On receipt of reasons, noticee is entitled to file objections to issuance of notice and the assessing officer is bound to dispose of the same by passing a speaking order. In the instant case, as the reasons have been disclosed in these proceedings, the assessing officer has to dispose of the objection, if filed, by passing a speaking order, before proceeding with the assessment in respect of the aforesaid five assessment years “

9. Therefore, in this branch of law and in these nature of proceedings, it was settled from before introduction of Section 148-A, that the Assessing Authority may afford minimal opportunity to the assessee to object to the initiation of re-assessment proceedings, before that proceeding is actually undertaken-to re-assess an assessee.

10. In view of the above consideration, even if it is assumed-for the sake of argument, that there does not exist any statutory requirement under Section 148-A to afford the petitioner an opportunity to formally object to the proposed assumption of re-assessment proceedings, yet, equally binding effect in law would force the Assessing Authority to afford such opportunity under the precedential law that pre-existed that statutory provision.

11. The force of law created by virtue of Article 141 of the Constitution of India has not been diluted or done away by any of the amendments made to the Income Tax Act, 1961.

12. Even otherwise, we find that the rule of law introduced by GKN Driveshafts (supra), is deeply entrenched in our jurisprudence as also finds reverberate in the statutory principle contained in Section 148-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

13. Consequently, we find no reason to allow the revenue an unfair advantage at this stage, by proceeding to initiate re-assessment proceedings against the petitioners ex parte, so to say. Affording minimal opportunity of objection to such proceedings before actual exercise is undertaken introduces more transparency and therefore, infuses more credibility in the re-assessment proceedings that the assessing officer proposes to undertake.

14. For the aforesaid reasons, we find no useful purpose will be served by keeping these petitions pending and calling counter affidavit, at this stage. Accordingly, the writ petitions are disposed of with the following directions:

(i)

Subject to the assessee filing their individual return on or before 31.10.2025, their respective assessing authority will confront the petitioner with information received as is being relied to initiate proceedings i.e. through email, within one week from the filing of return.

(ii)

Thereafter, the individual assessee will have two weeks time, to file objections to the proposed re-assessment proceedings through the mode as may be provided for by the Assessing Officer and as may be facilitated to ensure that the objections are actually received by the competent authority.

(iii)

Upon such objections being filed, a reasoned and speaking order may be passed by the concerned authority, within a further period of two weeks therefrom. Such order may be communicated to the individual assessees accordingly.

(iv)

If re-assessment proceedings are to be initiated, the first date of the re-assessment proceedings may be fixed with at least thirty days advance notice.

15. Needless to add if any jurisdictional issue survives, petitioners will be at liberty to approach the Court at that stage.