Delhi High Court – Orders
Pace Industries Private Limited vs The Income Tax Officer , Ward 19(3) And … on 12 August, 2025
Author: V. Kameswar Rao
Bench: V. Kameswar Rao
$~41
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 2128/2023
PACE INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. with Mr.
Rohit Jain, Mr. Aniket D. Agrawal
and Ms. Manisha Sharma, Advs.
versus
THE INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD 19(3) AND ORS.
.....Respondents
Through: Mr. Puneet Rai, SSC with Mr.
Ashvini Kumar, Mr. Rishabh Nangia
and Mr. Gibran Naushad, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR
ORDER
% 12.08.2025
1. This petition has been filed with the following prayers:
“(I) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus/ certiorari or any
other appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing (a)
notice dated 29.06.2021 issued under section 148, as it existed
prior to substitution vide Finance Act, 2021 w.e.f. 01.04.2021,
(b) letter/notice dated 20.05.2022, (c) order dated 28.07.2022
passed by Respondent No.1 under section 148A(d), (d) notice
dated 28.07.2022 issued under section 148 of the Act, (e)
impugned order dated 11.01.2023 disposing off the objections,
in the case of the Petitioner for assessment year 2015-16, and
all proceedings/ actions consequent thereto;
(II) stay the reassessment proceedings initiated under sections
147/148 vide the impugned notice dated 28.07.2022 issued
under section 148 of the Act, and/or any other proceedings
initiated thereunder for the assessment year 2015-16, during
pendency of the present petition;
(III) grant ad-interim ex-parte stay in terms of prayer (IV)
above;
(IV) call for the records of the case from the Respondents;”
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 22/08/2025 at 22:31:27
2. The submission of Mr. Ajay Vohra, learned senior counsel for the
petitioner is that the order dated 28.07.2022 passed by the respondent no. 1
under section 148A(d) and also notice dated 28.07.2022 issued under section
148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are bad in law as they are beyond the
period of limitation as prescribed under section 149 of the Act as amended
by the Finance Act which came into effect on 01.04.2021.
3. According to him, concedingly, the impugned notice and impugned
order have been passed post 01.04.2021 and as such, the same need to be set
aside.
4. Mr. Ajay Vohra also submits that the issue is no more res integra as
the same has been decided by various High Courts including that of Bombay
High Court and of Rajasthan and Special Leave Petition filed by the
Revenue Department against the order of Bombay High Court, has been
dismissed. He has also drawn our attention to Mectech knitfabs Pvt. Ltd. vs.
DCIT Circle 16(1) New Delhi & Anr.W.P.(C) 1261/2023, a judgment
passed by this Court wherein paragraphs 11 onwards, this Court has stated
as under :
“11. It is relevant to refer to paragraph 19(e) and 19(f) from the decision
of the Supreme Court in Union of India and Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal (supra),
which sets out the concession as made on behalf of the Revenue: “e. The
Finance Act 2021 substituted the old regime for re-assessment with a new
regime. The first proviso to Section 149 does not expressly bar the
application of TOLA. Section 3 of TOLA applies to the entire Income-tax
Act, including Sections 149 and 151 of the new regime. Once the first
proviso to Section 149(1)(b) is read with TOLA, then all the notices issued
between 1 April 2021 and 30 June 2021 pertaining to assessment years
2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, and 2017-18 will be within the
period of limitation as explained in the tabulation below:
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 22/08/2025 at 22:31:27
.
f. The Revenue concedes that for the assessment year 2015-16, all
notices issued on or after 1 April 2021 will have to be dropped as
they will not fall for completion during the period prescribed under
TOLA;”
12. In view of the above concession, the impugned notice and
the proceedings relating thereto are required to be set aside. We
may also note the decision of the Supreme Court in Deepak Steel
and Power Ltd. v. Central Board of Direct Taxes and Ors.: Civil
Appeal No.5177/2025, decided on 02.04.2025. The said appeal
arose from orders passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Orissa and
Cuttack declining to entertain batch of petitions filed by the
Assessees. The attention of the Supreme Court was drawn to the
concession made on behalf of the Revenue in Union of India & Ors.
v. Rajeev Bansal (supra) and noting the same, the Supreme Court
allowed the appeals. The relevant extract of the said decision is set
out below:
“4. The learned counsel appearing for the revenue with his
usual fairness invited the attention of this Court to a three
judge bench decision of this Court in Union of India and Ors.
v. Rajeev Bansal, reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2693,
more particularly, paragraph 19(f) which reads thus:-
“19. (f) The Revenue concedes that for the assessment year
2015-2016, all notices issued on or after April 1, 2021 will
have to be dropped as they will not fall for completion during
the period prescribed under the Taxation and other
Laws(Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act,
2020.”
5. As the revenue made a concession in the aforesaid
decision that is for the assessment year 2015-2016, all notices
issued on or after 1st April, 2021 will have to be dropped as
they would not fall for completion during the period prescribed
under the taxation and other laws (Relaxation and Amendment
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 22/08/2025 at 22:31:27
of certain Provisions Act, 2020). Nothing further is required to
be adjudicated in this matter as the notices so far as the
present litigation is concerned is dated 25.6.2021.
6. In view of the aforesaid, in such circumstances referred to
above the original writ petition nos.2446 of 2023, 2543 of
2023 and 2544 of 2023 respectively filed before the High
Court of Orissa at Cuttack stands allowed.
13. The notice dated 26.07.2022 issued under Section 148 of
the Act stands quashed and set aside. Concededly, the controversy is
covered in favour of the petitioner by the decision of this court in
Makemytrip India Pvt. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income
Tax Circle 16 (1) Delhi & Anr.: Neutral Citation No.:
2025:DHC:1892-DB.
14. The petition is, accordingly, allowed and all proceedings
initiated pursuant thereto are set aside.
15. The next date of hearing, that is, 16.09.2025, stands cancelled.”
5. Whereas, Mr. Puneet Rai, learned counsel for respondents do not
contest the applicability of the judgment in the case of Union of India and
Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal: 2024 INSC 754 as followed by this Court in
Mectech knitfabs Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT Circle 16(1) New Delhi & Anr.
W.P.(C) 1261/2023.
6. If that be so, the impugned order dated 28.07.2022 passed under
section 148A (d) and also notice dated 28.07.2022 issued under section 148
of the Act, so also the proceedings initiated pursuant thereto are set aside.
7. The present petition is disposed of, as allowed.
8. All applications have become infructuous.
V. KAMESWAR RAO, J
VINOD KUMAR, J
AUGUST 12, 2025
ss
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 22/08/2025 at 22:31:27