Delhi High Court - Orders
Genpact Luxembourg S.A.R.L vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax ... on 17 September, 2025
Author: V. Kameswar Rao
Bench: V. Kameswar Rao
$~96 & 97
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 14205/2025 CM APPL. 58349/2025
+ W.P.(C) 14223/2025 CM APPL. 58377/2025
GENPACT LUXEMBOURG S.A.R.L.
.....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Sachit Jolly, Sr. Adv. with Ms.
Rashi Khanna and Mr. Devansh Jain,
Advs.
versus
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1 3 1,
INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI & ANR.
.....Respondent
Through: Mr. Vipul Agrawal, SSC, Ms. Sakshi
Shairwal, JSC, Mr. Akshat Singh,
JSC with Ms. Harshita and Mr.
Gaoraang Ranjan, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR
ORDER
% 17.09.2025
1. Issue notice.
2. Mr. Vipul Agrawal, Senior Standing Counsel on behalf of the respondents accepts notice.
3. The submission of Mr. Sachit Jolly, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner is that the present petition lays a challenge to a notice dated 30.03.2025 issued under Section 148A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("Act"), order dated 30.06.2025 under Section 148A(3) of the Act and notice dated 30.06.2025 under Section 148 of the Act thereby initiating 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 23/09/2025 at 21:35:54 reassessment proceedings against the petitioner for the Assessment Year ("AY") 2020-21 in W.P.(C) 14205/2025 and 2019-20 in W.P.(C) 14223/2025.
4. According to him, the issue which gave rise to the issuance of the Show Cause Notice is the case of the respondents that the interest income earned by the petitioner in view of Non-Convertible Debentures ("NCDs") floated by Genpact India Pvt. Ltd. ("GIPL") was entirely sham transaction, being in the nature of a colourable device as the same created a fictitious liability in the hands of the Indian entity GIPL. He, at the outset, submits that a similar reopening initiated in the AY 2018-19 on identical grounds has been quashed by this Court vide order dated 08.08.2024 in W.P.(C) 7784/2022 and as such the case of the petitioner being squarely covered in terms of the said order for the AY 2018-19, the reassessment now sought to be carried out is totally untenable.
5. It is also his submission that in terms of the Explanation 2 to the erstwhile Section 147 of the Act that was in operation prior to 01.04.2020, the income chargeable to tax was deemed to have escaped assessment in cases where such income was assessed to be taxed at a lower rate. However, in terms of the current reassessment regime, there is no such deeming provision whereby any income, which has been charged at a lower rate shall be deemed to have escaped assessment merely on the ground that there was a dispute/allegation regarding the rate on which such income was to be taxed.
6. He further states that the interest received by the petitioner company from GIPL was duly offered to tax @ 5% p.a. in the return of income for AY 2020-21 in W.P.(C) 14205/2025 and 2019-20 in W.P.(C) 14223/2025.
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 23/09/2025 at 21:35:54 Thus, it is erroneous on the part of the respondents to initiate reassessment proceedings solely on the ground that interest income received by the petitioner during the year under consideration has been wrongly subjected to a lower tax deduction rate under Section 194LD of the Act. Mr. Jolly presses the application for stay as according to him the issue requires consideration.
7. On the other hand, Mr. Vipul Agrawal justifies the issuance of the notice under Section 148A(1) of the Act, order under Section 148A(3) of the Act and also notice under Section 148 of the Act in the facts. He states that the reliance placed by Mr. Jolly on previous assessment year is totally misplaced as the ground of issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act in the earlier AY was on different grounds. He further states that he shall file a counter-affidavit.
8. If that be so, counter-affidavit be filed within four weeks. Rejoinder be filed within two weeks thereafter.
9. It is made clear that the respondents are within their right to continue with the reassessment proceedings and if the reassessment/assessment order passed is adverse to the petitioner, the same shall not be given effect to, till the next date of hearing.
10. Re-notify on 27.01.2026.
V. KAMESWAR RAO, J VINOD KUMAR, J SEPTEMBER 17, 2025/sr 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 23/09/2025 at 21:35:54