Delhi High Court sends Section 148 reassessment back to AO over lack of information sharing

Background and context

Amazon Web Services Inc Vs ACIT (Delhi High Court) concerns a challenge to reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act 1961. The assessee approached the Delhi High Court through a writ petition, asserting that the reassessment was essentially based on a mere change of opinion and without adequate disclosure of critical information relied upon by the Assessing Officer (AO).

The case stems from a prior completed reassessment under Section 147 read with Section 144C(13) for the relevant year, where the assessee’s returned income was ultimately accepted after examination of substantial cross‑border remittances. Despite this, fresh reassessment proceedings were later initiated, anchored on data reflected in the Risk Management Strategy (RMS) portal, without furnishing the underlying details to the assessee at the pre‑notice stage under Section 148A(1).

The Delhi High Court was called upon to decide whether the reassessment should continue in its present form, particularly in light of the alleged non‑supply of information and the limited enquiry conducted at the stage of Section 148A(3).

Earlier completed reassessment

The assessee’s counsel, Mr. Porus Kaka, pointed out that an earlier reassessment for the same year had already been completed.

  • The earlier assessment was framed under Section 147 read with Section 144C(13)
  • Order date: 26.12.2025
  • Transactions considered aggregated to Rs. 29,66,29,69,168

The Court was informed that in this prior exercise, the AO had examined the nature of the receipts and the underlying transactions, and having done so, accepted the assessee’s returned income. In other words, the AO had already applied his mind to significant foreign remittances connected with the assessee’s Indian operations.

Fresh notice under Section 148A(1)

Despite the above, the AO subsequently issued a notice under Section 148A(1) dated 31.03.2026, alleging escapement of income. This notice set out three separate information entries, drawn from specified sources, which the AO considered to be indicative of income that had not been fully brought to tax.

The notice reproduced the following three items:

  1. Information source: WARD INT. TAX 3(1)(1), Delhi

    • Description: Received foreign remittance u/s 195 from M/s TV Today Network Ltd. Without TDS
    • Information source document: Form 15CA/CB
    • Amount: Rs. 54,40,572

  2. Information source: WARD INT. TAX 1(1)(2), Delhi

    • Description: Foreign Outward Remittance
    • Provision invoked: Proceedings u/s 195(2) of the Act
    • Amount: Rs. 26,66,29,69,168

  3. Information source: WARD INT. TAX 1(1)(1), Delhi

    • Description: Foreign Outward Remittance
    • Basis: Verification of Form 15CC and (Non-Deduction of TDS by Indian Remitter transfer of information
    • Amount: Rs. 19,17,77,24,603

The AO treated this material as “information” indicating potential escapement of income warranting reassessment under the amended regime of Section 148A and Section 148.

Assessee’s challenge and submissions

The assessee’s main thrust was that the reassessment exercise was not genuinely based on new tangible material but was in substance a second look at issues already examined, which is not permissible as per the doctrine of “change of opinion”.

Key submissions by the assessee included:

  • Overlap with earlier assessment
    • The amounts of Rs. 54,40,572 and Rs. 26,66,29,69,168 were said to be embedded in or part of the larger transaction figure of Rs. 29,66,29,69,168 considered in the earlier reassessment order dated 26.12.2025.
    • Therefore, these items had already been the subject of scrutiny and acceptance in the earlier exercise under Section 147 read with Section 144C(13).