# Vikas Gupta v. U.O.I. & Ors

- **Citation:** (2022) 9 ILRA 147
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2022-09-08
- **Case number:** Writ Tax No. 554 of 2022
- **Bench:** Surya Prakash Kesarwani, Chandra Kumar Rai
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/vikas-gupta-v-u-o-i-ors-49026
- **Pages:** 18

## Headnote

A. Tax Law - Reassessment - Income
Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 147, 148, 151 &
282A - Information Technology Act,
2000 - Sections 2(d), 2(p) & 2(t) -
General Clauses Act, 1897 - Section
3(56).

Assumption of jurisdiction - Unsigned
Approval - Sub-section (1) of S.282A
contains
the
following
necessary
conditions:

(i) such notice or other document shall
be signed by that Authority and
(ii)
issued
in
paper
form
or
communicated in electronic form by that
authority
(iii) in accordance with such procedure
as may be prescribed. (Para 16)

Words and Phrases - (a)'and' - The word
"and" should normally be given its ordinary
meaning
and
should
be
understood
in
conjunctive sense.
The first and foremost condition u/s 282A(1) is
that notice or other document to be issued by
any income-tax authority shall be signed by that
authority. The word "and" has been used in
sub-section (1), in conjunctive sense
meaning thereby that such notice or other
document has first to be signed by the
authority and thereafter it may be issued
either
in
paper
form
or
may
be
communicated in electronic form by that
authority. In the present set of facts, it is the
admitted case of the respondents that the PCIT
has
not
recorded
satisfaction
under
his
signature prior to the issuance of notice by the
Assessing Officer u/s 148 of the Act, 1961. (Para
18, 19, 27)

(b) 'Signed' - General Clauses Act, 1897:
Section 3(56) - 'sign', with its grammatical
variations and cognate expressions, shall, with
reference to a person who is unable to write his
name, include 'mark', with its grammatical
variations and cognate expressions. As per
Webster's New World Dictionary, the word
"sign" means "to write one's name on, as in
acknowledging authorship, authorising action
etc." (Para 20, 21)

(c) 'shall be signed' - The expression
"shall be signed" used in S.282A(1) of the
Act, 1961 makes the signing of the notice
or other document by that authority a
mandatory
requirement. It is
not a
ministerial act or an empty formality
which can be dispensed with. (Para 23)

"Signed" means to sign one's name; to signify
assent or adhesion to by signing one's name; to
attest by signing or when a person is unable to
write his name then affixation of "mark" by such
person: The document must be signed or mark
must be affixed in such a way as to make it
appear that the person signing it or affixing his
mark is the author of it. Therefore, a notice or
other document as referred in S.282A(1) of the
Act, 1961 will take legal effect only after it is
signed by that income-tax authority, whether
physically or digitally. The usage of the word
"shall" make it a mandatory requirement. (Para
22, 23, 25, 28)

B. Validity of recording satisfaction u/s
151 by the Commissioner for the purposes
148 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
of issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act,
1961 - An Assessing Officer may issue
jurisdictional notice u/s 148 only after the
prescribed authority u/s 151 of the Act
records his satisfaction that it is fit case
for issue of notice u/s 148 - S.151 of the
Act, 1961 specifically provides recording of
satisfaction by the prescribed authority, on the
reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer that it
is a fit case for the issue of notice u/s 148 of the
Act, 1961. Unless the prescribed authority
u/s 151 of the Act, 1961 records his
satisfaction on application of mind and
under his signature, there cannot be a
valid
satisfaction
empowering
the
Assessing Officer to assume jurisdiction to
issue notice u/s 148 of the Act, 1961. (Para
28)

In the present case, there was no valid
satisfaction recorded by the by the prescribed
authority u/s 151 of the Act, 1961 when the
Assessing
Officer
issued
notice
to
the
assessees
u/s
148
of
the
Act,

## Text

_Characters 0–39,936 of 59,853. This is a partial read: ask again with offset=39936 for what follows._

9 All. Vikas Gupta Vs. U.O.I. & Ors.
147
(2022) 9 ILRA 147
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 08.09.2022

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE SURYA PRAKASH
KESARWANI, J.
THE HON'BLE CHANDRA KUMAR RAI, J.

Writ Tax No. 554 of 2022
with
other connected cases

Vikas Gupta ...Petitioner
Versus
U.O.I. & Ors. ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri Ankur Agarwal, Sri Ankur Agarwal, Sri
Ashish Bansal

Counsel for the Respondents:
A.S.G.I., Sri Gaurav Mahajan, Sri Krishna
Agarawal, Sri Praveen Kumar

A. Tax Law - Reassessment - Income
Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 147, 148, 151 &
282A - Information Technology Act,
2000 - Sections 2(d), 2(p) & 2(t) -
General Clauses Act, 1897 - Section
3(56).

Assumption of jurisdiction - Unsigned
Approval - Sub-section (1) of S.282A
contains
the
following
necessary
conditions:

(i) such notice or other document shall
be signed by that Authority and
(ii)
issued
in
paper
form
or
communicated in electronic form by that
authority
(iii) in accordance with such procedure
as may be prescribed. (Para 16)

Words and Phrases - (a)'and' - The word
"and" should normally be given its ordinary
meaning
and
should
be
understood
in
conjunctive sense.
The first and foremost condition u/s 282A(1) is
that notice or other document to be issued by
any income-tax authority shall be signed by that
authority. The word "and" has been used in
sub-section (1), in conjunctive sense
meaning thereby that such notice or other
document has first to be signed by the
authority and thereafter it may be issued
either
in
paper
form
or
may
be
communicated in electronic form by that
authority. In the present set of facts, it is the
admitted case of the respondents that the PCIT
has
not
recorded
satisfaction
under
his
signature prior to the issuance of notice by the
Assessing Officer u/s 148 of the Act, 1961. (Para
18, 19, 27)

(b) 'Signed' - General Clauses Act, 1897:
Section 3(56) - 'sign', with its grammatical
variations and cognate expressions, shall, with
reference to a person who is unable to write his
name, include 'mark', with its grammatical
variations and cognate expressions. As per
Webster's New World Dictionary, the word
"sign" means "to write one's name on, as in
acknowledging authorship, authorising action
etc." (Para 20, 21)

(c) 'shall be signed' - The expression
"shall be signed" used in S.282A(1) of the
Act, 1961 makes the signing of the notice
or other document by that authority a
mandatory
requirement. It is
not a
ministerial act or an empty formality
which can be dispensed with. (Para 23)

"Signed" means to sign one's name; to signify
assent or adhesion to by signing one's name; to
attest by signing or when a person is unable to
write his name then affixation of "mark" by such
person: The document must be signed or mark
must be affixed in such a way as to make it
appear that the person signing it or affixing his
mark is the author of it. Therefore, a notice or
other document as referred in S.282A(1) of the
Act, 1961 will take legal effect only after it is
signed by that income-tax authority, whether
physically or digitally. The usage of the word
"shall" make it a mandatory requirement. (Para
22, 23, 25, 28)

B. Validity of recording satisfaction u/s
151 by the Commissioner for the purposes
148 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
of issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act,
1961 - An Assessing Officer may issue
jurisdictional notice u/s 148 only after the
prescribed authority u/s 151 of the Act
records his satisfaction that it is fit case
for issue of notice u/s 148 - S.151 of the
Act, 1961 specifically provides recording of
satisfaction by the prescribed authority, on the
reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer that it
is a fit case for the issue of notice u/s 148 of the
Act, 1961. Unless the prescribed authority
u/s 151 of the Act, 1961 records his
satisfaction on application of mind and
under his signature, there cannot be a
valid
satisfaction
empowering
the
Assessing Officer to assume jurisdiction to
issue notice u/s 148 of the Act, 1961. (Para
28)

In the present case, there was no valid
satisfaction recorded by the by the prescribed
authority u/s 151 of the Act, 1961 when the
Assessing
Officer
issued
notice
to
the
assessees
u/s
148
of
the
Act,
1961.
Subsequent to issuance of the notice u/s 148
of the Act 1961 by the Assessing Officer, the
satisfaction u/s 151 was digitally signed by
the prescribed authority. Therefore, the point
of time when the Assessing Officer issued
notices u/s 148, he had no jurisdiction to
issue the impugned notices u/s 148 of the
Act, 1961. (Para 29)

There was no valid satisfaction u/s
151,
therefore,
the
question
whether
Principal
Chief
Commissioner
or
Chief
Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or
Commissioner
of
Income-tax
for
the
purposes of recording of satisfaction u/s
151 is a designated income-tax authority
u/s 282A of the Act, 1961, is left open.
Writ Tax No. 554 of 2022, Writ Tax No.
370 of 2022, Writ Tax No. 427 of 2022,
Writ Tax No. 475 of 2022, Writ Tax No.
487 of 2022, Writ Tax No. 555 of 2022,
Writ Tax No. 642 of 2022 and Writ Tax
No. 710 of 2022 are hereby allowed.
The impugned notices u/s 148 of the
Act,
1961
and
the
reassessment
orders, if any, passed by the Assessing
Officer
and
all
consequential
proceedings are hereby quashed. The
concerned income-tax authority shall be at
liberty
to
initiate
proceedings,
if
still
permissible, strictly in accordance with law
and on due observance of the relevant
provisions of the Act, 1961 and the Rules
framed thereunder. Writ Tax No. 694 of
2022 is dismissed inasmuch as recording
of satisfaction by the PCIT and issuance of
notice u/s 148 by the Assessing Officer are
simultaneous. Liberty is granted to the
petitioner to file appeal to challenge the
reassessment order. (Para 30 to 32) (E-4)

Precedent followed:

1. Maharaja Sir Pateshwari Prasad Singh Vs St.
of U.P., (1963) 50 ITR 731 (Para 19)

2. Rattan Anmol Singh Vs Ch. Atma Ram, 1955
(1) SCR 481; AIR 1954 SC 510 (Para 21)

3. Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd. Vs U.O.I.,
1967 (1) SCR 543; AIR 1967 SC 526 (Para 22)

4. Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. Vs
Navigant Technologies (P.) Ltd., (2021) 7 SCC
657 (Para 23)

5. Commissioner of Agricultural Income Tax Vs
Keshab Chandra Mandal, 1950 SCR 435; AIR
1950 SC 265; (1950) 18 ITR 569 (Para 24)

6. Chhugamal Rajpal Vs S.P. Chaliha & ors.,
(1971) 1 SCC 453; AIR 1971 SC 730; (1971) ITR
603 (Para 26)

(Delivered by Hon'ble Surya Prakash
Kesarwani, J.)

1. Heard learned counsel for the
petitioners,
Sri
S.P.
Singh,
learned
Additional Solicitor General of India
assisted by Sri Krishna Agrawal and Sri
Praveeen Kumar, learned counsel for the
respondents in all the above-noted writ
petitions.

2. These writ petitions have been filed
praying to quash the notice under Section
148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961
(hereinafter referred to as ''the Act, 1961')
9 All. Vikas Gupta Vs. U.O.I. & Ors.
149
and the reassessment orders passed under
Section 147/148 of the Act, 1961.

3. Since common questions of law on
similar set of facts are involved in this
batch of writ petitions, therefore, with the
consent of learned counsels for the parties,
the Writ Tax No.554 of 2022 have been
heard as a leading writ petition and facts of
this case are being noted.

4. In the above noted writ petitions,
the following reliefs have been sought by
the petitioners:

"WRIT TAX No. 554/22

(I) Issue a writ, or direction in the
nature
of
Certiorari
quashing
the
impugned notice u/s 148 of the Act, dated
31.03.2021, issued by respondent no.3, for
A.Y. 2013-14. (Annexure No. 4).

(ii) Issue a writ, order or
direction in the nature of Prohibition
thereby restraining Respondent No. 3 from
undertaking
further
reassessment
proceedings pending before him against the
Petitioner, for A.Y. 2013-14 in pursuance of
notice u/s 148 of the Act, dated 31.03.2021.

(iii) Issue any other writ order or
direction which this Hon'ble Court may
deem fit and proper in the circumstances of
the case.

(iv) Award the costs of the
petition to the petitioner.

(v) Issue a Writ, Order or
Direction in the nature of Certiorari to
quash
the
Assessment
Order
dated
23.03.2022 passed by Respondent No.4
(Annexure - 13) being in consequence of
the
proceedings
which
is
without
jurisdiction and without giving an effective
opportunity of being heard.

(vi) Issue writ order or direction
in
nature
of
mandamus
directing
Respondent Nos.3 & 4 not to proceed
further towards the recovery of demand
created in consequence of the assessment
order dated 23.03.2022 (Annexure - 13)/
not treat the Petitioner as assessee in
default, during the pendency of the present
writ petition.

WRIT TAX No. - 370 of 2022

(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in
the nature of Certiorari quashing the notice
dated 08.02.2022 (Annexure-1 to the writ
petition) issued by the Respondent No. 1
disposing of the objections raised by the
petitioner against the issuance of notice
dated 31.03.2021 under Section 148 of the
Income Tax Act for the Assessment Year
2015-16;

(b) Issue a writ, order or
direction in the nature of Certiorari
quashing the notice dated 08.02.2022
(Annexure-3 to the writ petition) issued by
the Income Tax Department under Section
143(2) read with Section 147 of the Income
Tax Act, 1961;

(c) Issue a writ, order or
direction in the nature of Certiorari
quashing the notice dated 31.03.2021
issued by the Assistant Commissioner of
Income
Tax
Officer,
Circle
5(1)(1),
Gautam Budh Nagar under Section 148 of
the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the
Assessment Year 2015-16 (Annexure-2 to
the writ petition);

(c-i) Issue a writ, order or
direction in the nature of Certiorari
quashing the assessment order dated
31.03.2022 u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act,
1961 passed by the respondent no. 3, the
demand notice and computation sheet
issued to the petitioner (Annexure-19 to the
writ petition);

(d) Issue a writ, order or
direction in the nature of Mandamus
150 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
restraining
the
respondents
from
proceeding
with
the
consequential
reassessment initiated vide notice dated
31.03.2021 issued under Section 148 of the
Income Tax Act, particularly, the notices
dated 23.11.2021 (Annexure-9 to the writ
petition) and 08.02.2022 (Annexure-3 to the
writ petition) issued under Section 142(1)
and Section 143(2) read with Section 147 of
the Income Tax Act respectively;

(d-i) Issue a writ, order or
direction in the nature of Mandamus
restraining the respondents from taking any
coercive steps pursuant to the show cause
notice dated 31.03.2022 issued by the
respondent no. 3 u/s 274 read with Section
271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to
the petitioner (Annexure-22 to the writ
petition).

WRIT TAX No. - 427 of 2022

(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in
the nature of Certiorari quashing the notice
dated 16.02.2022 (Annexure-1 to the writ
petition) issued by the Respondent No. 1
disposing of the objections raised by the
petitioner against the issuance of notice
dated 31.03.2021 under Section 148 of the
Income Tax Act for the Assessment Year
2014-15;

(b) Issue a writ, order or
direction in the nature of Certiorari
quashing the notice dated 25.11.2021
(Annexure-3 to the writ petition) issued by
the Income Tax Department under Section
143(2) read with Section 147 of the Income
Tax Act, 1961;

(c) Issue a writ, order or
direction in the nature of Certiorari
quashing the notice dated 31.03.2021
(served on 01.04.2021) (Annexure-2 to the
writ petition) issued by the Income Tax
Officer, Ward-2(3) (1), Kanpur Nagar
under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act,
1961 for the Assessment Year 2014-15;

(d) Issue a writ, order or
direction in the nature of Mandamus
restraining
the
respondents
from
proceeding
with
the
consequential
reassessment proceedings initiated vide
notice dated 31.03.2021 issued under
section 148 of the Income Tax Act,
particularly, the notice dated 25.11.2021
issued under Section 143(2) read with
Section 147 of the Income Tax Act
respectively;

WRIT TAX No. - 475 of 2022

(i) issue writ, order or direction
in the nature of certiorari so as to quash
the notice dated 31.03.2021 (Annexure -
10) issued under section 148 by the
Respondent No3, as the same being illegal
having been issued without prior approval
under section 151 of the Act, hit by first
proviso to section 147 and is also based on
'change of opinion';

(ii) issue writ, order or direction
in the nature of certiorari so as to quash
the notices dated 20.12.2022, 22.02.2022 &
28.02.2022 (Annexures 15, 18 & 19
respectively) issued by Respondent No.2
under section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act,
for the purposes of making reassessment
and that too in pursuance of an invalid
notice;

WRIT TAX No. - 487 of 2022

(i) Issue writ, or direction in the
nature of Certiorari so as to quash the
notice dated 31.03.2021 (Annexure - 6)
issued
under
section
148
by
the
Respondent No3, as the same being illegal
having been issued without prior approval
under section 151 of the Act, hit by first
9 All. Vikas Gupta Vs. U.O.I. & Ors.
151
proviso to section 147 and is also based on
'change of opinion';

(ii) issue writ, order or direction
in the nature of certiorari so as to quash
the notices dated 08.02.2022 & 28.02.2022
(Annexures 14 & 16 respectively) issued by
Respondent No.2 under section 142(1) of
the Income Tax Act, for the purposes of
making reassessment and that too in
pursuance of an invalid notice;

WRIT TAX No. - 555 of 2022

(i) Issue a writ, or direction in the
nature
of
Certiorari
quashing
the
impugned notice u/s 148 of the Act, dated
31.03.2021, issued by respondent no.3, for
A.Y. 2013-14. (Annexure No. 4).

(ii) Issue a writ, order or
direction in the nature of Prohibition
thereby restraining Respondent No. 3 from
undertaking
further
reassessment
proceedings pending before him against the
Petitioner, for A.Y. 2013-14 in pursuance of
notice u/s 148 of the Act, dated 31.03.2021.

(III) Issue any other writ order or
direction which this Hon'ble Court may
deem fit and proper in the circumstances of
the case.

(iv) Award the costs of the
petition to the petitioner.

(v) Issue a Writ, Order or
Direction in the nature of Certiorari to
quash
the
Assessment
Order
dated
31.03.2022 passed by Respondent No.4
(Annexure 11) being in consequence of the
proceedings which is without jurisdiction
and without giving an effective opportunity
of being heard.

(vi) Issue writ order or direction
in
nature
of
mandamus
directing
Respondent Nos.3 & 4 not to proceed
further towards the recovery of demand
created in consequence of the assessment
order dated 31.03.2022 (Annexure -11)/ not
treat the Petitioner as assessee in default,
during the the present writ petition.

WRIT TAX No. - 642 of 2022

A. issue a writ, order or direction in the
nature of certiorari quashing the impugned
notice issued under section 148 of income tax
act dt. 31.03.2021 and order disposing off
objections dt. 26.03.2022, as also the sanction
authorising the issuance of such notice for a.y.
2013-14.

B Issue a writ, order or direction in the
nature of certiorari quashing the impugned
order of reassessment dt. 30.03.2022 which is
made contrary to settled principles of law and in
violation to the settled principles of natural
justice.

WRIT TAX No. - 694 of 2022

1. issue a writ, order or direction in
the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned
notice issued under section 148 of income tax
act dt. 31.03.2021 and order disposing off
objections dt. 10.02.2022, since the notice u/s
148 has been issued without obtaining the
sanction of respondent 2, which was received
post-facto i.e. after the issuance of impugned
notice.

2. issue a writ, order or direction in
the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned
order of reassessment dt. 26.03.2022

3. Issue any other writ, order or
direction as this hon'ble court may deem fit and
proper in the circumstances of the case.

4. award costs in favour of the
petitioner

WRIT TAX No. - 710 of 2022

1. Issue a writ, order or direction in
the nature of certiorari quashing the
152 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
impugned notice issued under section 148
of income tax act dt. 31.03.2021 and order
disposing off objections dt. 02.03.2022, as
also the sanction authorising the issuance
of such notice for a.y. 2013-14.

2. issue a writ, order or direction in
the nature of certiorari quashing the
impugned order of reassessment dt.
28.03.2022 and consequential proceeding
which is made contrary to settled principles
of law and in violation to the settled
principles of natural justice.

3. issue any other writ, order or
direction as this hon'ble court may deem fit
and proper in the circumstances of the
case.

4. award costs in favour of the
petitioner"

Facts:-

5. In this batch of writ petitions, the
admitted facts are that on the basis of
unsigned alleged digital approval under
Section 151, Assessing officer issued
notices to the assessees under Section 148
of the Act, 1961. The point of time when
the aforesaid approval under Section 151 of
the Act, 1961 was signed, is subsequent to
the issuance of notices by the Assessing
Officer under Section 148 of the Act, 1961.

6. Facts of Writ Tax No.554 of 2022
are that as per approval under Section 151
of the Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year
2013-14 filed as Annexure-4 to the writ
petition, the Principal Commissioner of
Income Tax (for short ''PCIT') granted
approval on 31.03.2021 at 07:05 P.M., i.e.
19:05 hours by digitally signing the
approval. Jurisdictional notice under
Section 148 of the Act, 1961 was digitally
signed by the respondent No.3/ Assessing
officer on 31.03.2021 at 05:43 P.M., i.e.
17:43 hours, which is prior to the grant of
digitally signed approval by the PCIT
under Section 151 of the Act, 1961. As per
Section 151 of the Act, 1961, as stood at
the relevant time no notice shall be issued
by the Assessing Officer after expiry of
four years from the end of the Assessment
Year
unless
the
Principal
Chief
Commissioner/ PCIT is satisfied on the
reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer
that it is a fit case for issuing such notice.

7. In Writ Tax No. 370 of 2022 the
impugned notice under section 148 of the
Act, 1961 relating to the assessment year
2015-16 was issued on 31.3.2021 at 6.33
p.m. whereas the satisfaction under section
151
was
recorded
by
the
PCIT
subsequently at 7.15 p.m. on the same day.
In Writ Tax No. 427 of 2022 the impugned
notice under section 148 of the Act, 1961
relating to the assessment year 2014-15
was issued on 31.3.2021 at 3.32 p.m.
whereas the satisfaction under section 151
was recorded by the PCIT subsequently at
4.02 p.m. on the same day. In Writ Tax No.
475 of 2022 the impugned notice under
section 148 of the Act, 1961 relating to the
assessment year 2014-15 was issued on
31.3.2021 at 3.34 p.m. whereas the
satisfaction under section 151 was recorded
by the PCIT subsequently at 4.02 p.m. on
the same day. In Writ Tax No. 487 of 2022
the impugned notice under section 148 of
the Act, 1961 relating to the assessment
year 2015-16 was issued on 31.3.2021 at
3.38 p.m. whereas the satisfaction under
section 151 was recorded by the PCIT
subsequently at 4.02 p.m. on the same day.
In Writ Tax No. 555 of 2022 the impugned
notice under section 148 of the Act, 1961
relating to the assessment year 2013-14
was issued on 31.3.2021 at 6.32 p.m.
whereas the satisfaction under section 151
was recorded by the PCIT subsequently at
7.00 p.m. on the same day. In Writ Tax No.
9 All. Vikas Gupta Vs. U.O.I. & Ors.
153
642 of 2022 the impugned notice under
section 148 of the Act, 1961 relating to the
assessment year 2013-14 was issued on
31.3.2021 at 6.25 p.m. whereas the
satisfaction under section 151 was recorded
by the PCIT subsequently at 7.07 p.m. on
the same day. In Writ Tax No. 710 of 2022
the impugned notice under section 148 of
the Act, 1961 relating to the assessment
year 2013-14 was issued on 31.3.2021 at
2.40 p.m. whereas the satisfaction under
section 151 was recorded by the PCIT
subsequently at 3.52 p.m. on the same day.

8. In Writ Tax No. 694 of 2022 the
impugned notice under section 148 of the
Act, 1961 relating to the assessment year
2013-14 was issued on 31.3.2021 at 4.01
P.M. by Assessing Officer and satisfaction
was recorded by the PCIT at 4.01 p.m.
Thus the recording of satisfaction under
section 151 and issuance of notice under
section 148 are simultaneous.

Submissions
on
behalf
of
the
Petitioners:-

9. Learned counsel for the petitioners
submitted that the impugned notices under
Section 148 of the Act, 1961 are wholly
without jurisdiction, inasmuch as, it was
issued without prior satisfaction/approval
of the competent authority under Section
151 of the Act, 1961. Since at the point of
time when notices under Section 148 of the
Act, 1961 were issued, there was no valid
satisfaction/ approval of the competent
authority, therefore, the Assessing Officer
could not assume jurisdiction to issue
notice under Section 148 of the Act, 1961.
Hence, the notices under Section 148 of the
Act, 1961 are without jurisdiction and thus
invalid.
Consequently,
the
subsequent
proceedings including reassessment orders
are also without jurisdiction. Section 282A
of the Act, 1961 has no relevance with
respect to the recording of satisfaction or
prior permission by the PCIT under Section
151 of the Act, 1961.

Submissions
on
behalf
of
the
respondents:-

10. Learned Additional Solicitor
General of India has submitted that the
unsigned satisfaction of the PCIT stands
validated in view of Section 282A of the
Act, 1961 inasmuch as the digital or
physical unsigned satisfaction recorded by
the
PCIT
shall
be
deemed
to
be
authenticated under Section 282A of the
Act, 1961 read with Rule 127A of the
Income Tax Rules, 1962 and Sections 2(d),
2(p) and 2(t) of the Information Technology
Act, 2000 inasmuch as satisfaction bears
the name and office of a designated income
tax authority, i.e. PCIT. He submits that the
moment the PCIT has pushed in "Generate
Tap in ITBA System" his satisfaction under
Section 151 of the Act, 1961, would be
deemed to be an authenticated document in
terms of Section 282A and thus is a valid
satisfaction under Section 151 of the Act,
1961. The digital signature affixed by the
PCIT on his aforesaid satisfaction under
Section 151 of the Act, 1961, subsequent to
issuance of the notice by the Assessing
Officer under Section 148, would not
invalidate the notices under Section 148 of
the Act, 1961. He referred to paragraphs
17, 18 and 19 of the supplementary counter
affidavit dated 02.05.2022 sworn by Nisha
Gupta, Income Tax officer, Ward-5(2)(5),
NOIDA, which read as under:

"17. That a perusal of the
aforesaid provisions demonstrates that if a
notice or other document is issued served
or given for the purpose of the Act by any
income tax authority, the same shall be
154 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
deemed to be authenticated, if the name
and office of a designated income tax
authority is printed, stamp or otherwise
written thereon.

18. That the aforesaid provisions
of law clearly demonstrates that the
approval issued by the PCIT in electronic
form, without affixing digital signature is
also deemed to be authenticated and
therefore affixation of digital signature is
not a precondition for validation of the
document.

19.
That
it
is
respectfully
submitted that in view of the above, the
approval granted by PCIT is valid approval
even if the digital signature was affixed
later in point of time."

Discussion and Findings:-

11. We have carefully considered the
submissions of the learned counsels for the
parties and perused the records of the writ
petitions. Before we proceed to examine
the rival contentions of learned counsels for
the parties, it would be appropriate to
reproduce below the relevant provisions of
the Act, 1961, the Income Tax Rules, 1962
and Information and Technology Act,
2000:-

"A. Income Tax Act, 1961

"Issue of notice where income
has escaped assessment.

Section 148. (1) Before making
the
assessment,
reassessment
or
recomputation under section 147, the
Assessing Officer shall serve on the
assessee a notice requiring him to furnish
within such period, as may be specified in
the notice, a return of his income or the
income of any other person in respect of
which he is assessable under this Act
during the previous year corresponding to
the relevant assessment year, in the
prescribed form and verified in the
prescribed manner and setting forth such
other particulars as may be prescribed;
and the provisions of this Act shall, so far
as may be, apply accordingly as if such
return were a return required to be
furnished under section 139 :

Provided that in a case--

(a) where a return has been
furnished during the period commencing on
the 1st day of October, 1991 and ending on
the 30th day of September, 2005 in
response to a notice served under this
section, and

(b) subsequently a notice has
been served under sub-section (2) of
section 143after the expiry of twelve
months specified in the proviso to subsection (2) of section 143, as it stood
immediately before the amendment of said
sub-section by the Finance Act, 2002 (20 of
2002) but before the expiry of the time limit
for making the assessment, re-assessment
or recomputation as specified in subsection (2) of section 153, every such notice
referred to in this clause shall be deemed to
be a valid notice:

Provided further that in a case--

(a) where a return has been
furnished during the period commencing on
the 1st day of October, 1991 and ending on
the 30th day of September, 2005, in
response to a notice served under this
section, and

(b) subsequently a notice has
been served under clause (ii) of sub-section
(2) of section 143 after the expiry of twelve
months specified in the proviso to clause
(ii) of sub-section (2) of section 143, but
before the expiry of the time limit for
making the assessment, reassessment or
recomputation as specified in sub-section
(2) of section 153, every such notice
9 All. Vikas Gupta Vs. U.O.I. & Ors.
155
referred to in this clause shall be deemed to
be a valid notice.

Explanation.--For the removal of
doubts, it is hereby declared that nothing
contained in the first proviso or the second
proviso shall apply to any return which has
been furnished on or after the 1st day of
October, 2005 in response to a notice
served under this section.

(2) The Assessing Officer shall,
before issuing any notice under this section,
record his reasons for doing so.

Sanction for issue of notice.

Section 151. (1) No notice shall
be issued under section 148 by an
Assessing Officer, after the expiry of a
period of four years from the end of the
relevant
assessment
year,
unless
the
Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief
Commissioner or Principal Commissioner
or Commissioner is satisfied, on the
reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer,
that it is a fit case for the issue of such
notice.

(2) In a case other than a case
falling under sub-section (1), no notice
shall be issued under section 148 by an
Assessing Officer, who is below the rank of
Joint Commissioner, unless the Joint
Commissioner is satisfied, on the reasons
recorded by such Assessing Officer, that it
is a fit case for the issue of such notice.

(3) For the purposes of subsection (1) and sub-section (2), the
Principal Chief Commissioner or the Chief
Commissioner
or
the
Principal
Commissioner or the Commissioner or the
Joint Commissioner, as the case may be,
being satisfied on the reasons recorded by
the Assessing Officer about fitness of a case
for the issue of notice under section 148,
need not issue such notice himself.

Authentication of notices and
other documents.

282A. (1) Where this Act requires
a notice or other document to be issued by
any income-tax authority, such notice or
other document shall be signed and issued
in paper form or communicated in
electronic form by that authority in
accordance with such procedure as may
be prescribed.

(2)
Every
notice
or
other
document to be issued, served or given for
the purposes of this Act by any income-tax
authority,
shall
be
deemed
to
be
authenticated if the name and office of a
designated income-tax authority is printed,
stamped or otherwise written thereon.

(3) For the purposes of this
section, a designated income-tax authority
shall mean any income-tax authority
authorised by the Board to issue, serve or
give such notice or other document after
authentication in the manner as provided in
sub-section (2).

B. Income Tax Rules, 1962:-

Authentication of notices and
other documents.

Rule 127A. (1) Every notice or
other document communicated in electronic
form by an income-tax authority under the
Act shall be deemed to be authenticated,-

(a) in case of electronic mail or
electronic
mail
message
(hereinafter
referred to as the e-mail), if the name and
office of such income-tax authority-

(i) is printed on the e-mail body,
if the notice or other document is in the email body itself; or

(ii) is printed on the attachment
to the e-mail, if the notice or other
document is in the attachment,

and the e-mail is issued from the
designated e-mail address of such incometax authority;
156 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES

(b) in case of an electronic
record, if the name and office of the
income-tax authority-

(i) is displayed as a part of the
electronic record, if the notice or other
document is contained as text or remark in
the electronic record itself; or

(ii) is printed on the attachment
in the electronic record, if the notice or
other document is in the attachment,

and such electronic record is
displayed on the designated website.

(2)
The
Principal
Director
General of Income-tax (Systems) or the
Director General of Income-tax (Systems)
shall specify the designated e-mail address
of the income-tax authority, the designated
website and the procedure, formats and
standards for ensuring authenticity of the
communication.

Explanation. - For the purposes
of this rule, the expressions-

(i)
"electronic
mail"
and
"electronic mail message" shall have the
same meanings respectively assigned to
them in Explanation to section 66A of the
Information Technology Act, 2000 (21 of
2000);

(ii) "electronic record" shall have
the same meaning as assigned to it in
clause (t) of sub-section (1) of section 2 of
the Information Technology Act, 2000 (21
of 2000).

C. Information Technology Act,
2000:-

Section
2(d)
―affixing
electronic signature with its grammatical
variations and cognate expressions means
adoption of any methodology or procedure
by
a
person
for
the
purpose
of
authenticating an electronic record by
means of digital signature;

Section 2(p) ―digital signature
means authentication of any electronic
record by a subscriber by means of an
electronic
method
or
procedure
in
accordance with the provisions of section
3;

Section 2(t) ―electronic record
means data, record or data generated,
image or sound stored, received or sent in
an electronic form or micro film or
computer generated micro fiche;

Explanation to Section 66-A--
For the purposes of this section, terms
"electronic mail" and "electronic mail
message" means a message or information
created or transmitted or received on a
computer,
computer
system,
computer
resource
or
communication
device
including attachments in text, image, audio,
video and any other electronic record,
which may be transmitted with the
message."

12. Annexure-4 to the writ petition is
the alleged approval, under section 151 of
the Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year
2013-14 which was granted by the PCIT on
31.03.2021 at 7:05 P.M. i.e. 19:05 hours by
digitally signing the approval. Notice under
Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961
was digitally signed by the respondent no.3
on 31.03.2021 at 5:43 P.M. i.e. 17:43 hours,
which is prior to the satisfaction recorded
by the PCIT. Section 151 of the Act, 1961
as stood at the relevant time provides that
no notice shall be issued under section
148 of the Act by Assessing Officer after
expiry of period of 4 years from the end of
assessment year unless Principal Chief
Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or
Principal Commissioner or Commissioner
is satisfied, on the reason recorded by the
assessing officer that it is a fit case for
issuing such notice.
9 All. Vikas Gupta Vs. U.O.I. & Ors.
157

13. Thus, as per provision of
Section 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961,
an assessing officer gets jurisdiction to
issue notice to an assessee under Section
148 of the Act, 1961 after Principal Chief
Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or
Principal Commissioner or Commissioner
of Income Tax is satisfied on the reason
recorded by the assessing officer that it is
a fit case for issuing such notice. The date
and time of the approval granted digitally
under Section 151 of the Act and the date
and time of the notice under section 148
of the Act, shows that the satisfaction was
recorded by the PCIT digitally after the
notice under section 148 was digitally
signed and issued by the Assessing
Officer.

14. Thus, the following questions
arise for consideration:-

(a)
Whether
an
unsigned
content in an electronic record said to
be pushed through electronic mode at a
particular point of time, can be said to
be a valid satisfaction of the PCIT
under Section 151 for assumption of
jurisdiction by the Assessing Officer to
issue
jurisdictional
notice
to
an
assessee under Section 148 of the Act,
1961?

(b) Whether impugned notices
under Section 148 of the Act, 1961
issued by the Assessing Officer without
satisfaction signed by the PCIT under
Section 151 of the Act, 1961, is a valid
notice?

15. The whole case set up by the
respondents is that "unsigned approval"
issued in electronic form to the Assessing
Officer is a valid approval as it is an
authenticated
document
within
the
meaning of Section 282A of the Act,
1961. Therefore, we proceed to examine
correctness of the stand taken by the
respondents in their oral submissions as
also made in paragraphs 17, 18 and 19 of
supplementary counter affidavit dated
02.05.2022.

Whether
unsigned
alleged
approval is an authenticated document
under Section 282A of the Act, 1961:-

16. Sub-section (1) of Section 282A
contains
the
following
necessary
conditions:

(i)
such
notice
or
other
document shall be signed by that
Authority and

(ii) issued in paper form or
communicated in electronic form by that
authority

(iii) in accordance with such
procedure as may be prescribed.

17.

The
procedure
for
communication in electronic form has
been prescribed under Rule 127A of the
Rules 1962.

18. The first and foremost condition
under Section (1) of Section 282A is that
notice or other document to be issued by
any Income Tax Authority shall be signed
by that authority. The word "and" has
been
used
in
sub-Section
(1),
in
conjunctive sense meaning thereby that
such notice or other document has first
to be signed by the authority and
thereafter it may be issued either in
paper form or may be communicated
in electronic form by that authority. In
the present set of facts, it is the
admitted case of the respondents that
the PCIT has not recorded satisfaction
under his signature prior to the
158 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
issuance of notice by the Assessing
Officer under Section 148 of the Act,
1961.

19. In the case of Maharaja Sir
Pateshwari Prasad Singh vs. State of
U.P. (1963) 50 ITR 731, three judges
bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court held that
the word "and" should normally be given
its ordinary meaning and should be
understood in conjunctive sense. Thus, as
per provisions of sub-Section (1) of Section
282A, the notice or other document shall be
signed and thereafter it shall be issued in
paper form or may be communicated in
electronic form then the document or notice
so issued or communicated, shall be
deemed to be an authenticated notice or
document in terms of Rule 127A of the
Rules, 1962.

Signed - Meaning:-

20. The word "signed" has not been
defined under the Act, 1961, which is a
central Act. However, it has been defined in
Section 3(56) of the General Clauses Act,
1897, as under:

"3(56)
"sign",
with
its
grammatical
variations
and
cognate
expressions, shall, with reference to a
person who is unable to write his name,
include "mark", with its grammatical
variations and cognate expressions;"

21. As per Webster's New World
Dictionary, the word ''sign' means ''to write
one's name on, as in acknowledging
authorship, authorising action etc.' In
Rattan Anmol Singh vs. Ch. Atma Ram,
1955 (1) SCR 481 : AIR 1954 SC 510
(para-6), Hon'ble Supreme Court explained
the meaning of the word ''sign' and held as
under:

"6.
The
Oxford
English
Dictionary sets out thirteen shades of
meaning to the word "subscribe", most of
them either obsolete or now rarely used.
The only two which can have any real
relation to the present matter are the
following:

1. "To write (one's name or mark)
on, originally at the bottom of a document,
especially as a witness or contesting party;
to sign one's name to."

This meaning is described as
"rare."

2. "To sign one's name to; to
signify assent or adhesion to by signing
one's name; to attest by signing."

This appears to be its modern
meaning, and is also one of the meanings
given to the word "sign", namely "to
attest
or
confirm
by
adding
one's
signature; to affix one's name to (a
document) etc."

22. In Hindustan Construction Co.
Ltd. vs. Union of India, 1967 (1) SCR 543
: AIR 1967 SC 526 (Para-7), Hon'ble
Supreme Court held as under:

"7. This brings us to the meaning
of the word "sign" as used in the expression
"signed copy". In Webster's New World
Dictionary, the word "sign" means "to write
one's name on, as in acknowledging
authorship, authorising action etc." To
write one's name is signature. Section 3(56)
of the General Clauses Act, No. 10 of 1897,
has not defined the word "sign" but has
extended its meaning with reference to a
person who is unable to write his name to
include "mark" with its grammatical
variations and cognate expressions. This
provision indicates that signing means
writing one's name on some document or
paper. In Mohesh Lal v. Busunt Kumaree,
(1881) ILR 6 Cal 340, a question arose as
9 All. Vikas Gupta Vs. U.O.I. & Ors.
159
to what "signature" meant in connection
with S.20 of the Limitation Act, No. IX of
1871. It was observed that "where a party
to a contract signs his name in any part of
it in such a way as to acknowledge that he
is the party contracting, that is a sufficient
signature". It was further observed that the
document must be signed in such a way as
to make it appear that the person signing
it is the author of it, and if that appears it
does not matter what the form of the
instrument is, or in what part of it the
signature occurs. "

23. In Dakshin Haryana Bijli
Vitran
Nigam
Ltd.
vs.
Navigant
Technologies (P.) Ltd. (2021) 7 SCC 657
(paras 25 and 26), Hon'ble Supreme
Court observed that the words ''shall be
signed', makes signing mandatory for
authentication and held as under:

"Legal requirement of signing
the award

25. The legal requirement of
signing the arbitral award by a sole
arbitrator, or the members of a tribunal is
found in Section 31 of the 1996 Act,
which provides the form and content of
an arbitral award. Section 31 provides
that :

"31. Form and contents of
arbitral award.- (1) An arbitral award
shall be made in writing and shall be
signed by the members of the arbitral
tribunal.