Bombay High Court Grants Aditya Birla Real Estate Permission to Amend Writ Petition

The Bombay High Court has granted Aditya Birla Real Estate Limited the permission to amend its pending writ petition. The company seeks to challenge the constitutional validity of Sections 147A and 292BC of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Court allowed the amendments sought by the company and directed that the revised pleadings be carried out within one week.

A Division Bench comprising Justice B.P. Colabawalla and Justice Firdosh P. Pooniwalla in the Writ Petition filed by Aditya Birla Real Estate Limited against the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax allowed the amendments without the need for a separate application. The petition was already pending before the Court, and a Rule had been issued on 11 November 2024. At that time, the Court also granted interim relief in favor of the petitioner.

When the matter was taken up on 10 June 2026, the petitioner sought permission to amend the writ petition to specifically challenge the vires, or constitutional validity, of Section 147A and Section 292BC of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The bench noted, “In the above matter, Rule was issued by order dated 11th November 2024, and interim relief was also granted to the Petitioner. Today, the matter is moved, seeking amendments to the Writ Petition to challenge the vires of Section 147A and Section 292BC of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Though Rule has been issued, considering that the vires of two provisions are challenged, we have not insisted that the Petitioner file a separate application seeking amendments.”

The court also observed that the counsel of the Income Tax Department, Adv. Akhileshwar Sharma, did not oppose the proposed amendments. Accordingly, the High Court allowed Aditya Birla Real Estate Limited to amend the writ petition in terms of the schedule of amendments submitted before the Court. The bench ordered, “The amendments are to be carried out within a period of 1 week from today.”

Section 147A of the Income Tax Act reads as follows: “Assessing Officer for purposes of sections 148 and 148A. Notwithstanding anything contained in any judgment, order, or decree of any court or in section 151A or in any scheme framed thereunder, for the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that the Assessing Officer for the purposes of sections 148 and 148A shall mean and shall always be deemed to have meant to be an Assessing Officer other than the National Faceless Assessment Centre or any assessment unit referred to in sub-section (3) of section 144B.”

Section 292BC of the Income Tax Act reads as follows: “Circumstances in which approvals by income-tax authority not to be invalid. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or in any judgment, order, or decree of any Court, for the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that any approval given by an income-tax authority in relation to any assessment, reassessment, or recomputation proceedings under this Act shall be deemed to be administrative and supervisory in nature and shall not be invalid or shall not be deemed to be invalid by reason of any insufficiency of the reasons recorded or by reason of any defect in the form or manner of its authentication or communication, including whether digital signatures have been appended to such approval or not, where such approval is granted electronically.”