Back
RAJIV SHAKDHER, TARA VITASTA GANJU
Lotus Law Partners Llp Through Legal Heir of Its Managing Partner – Appellant
Versus
Income Tax Officer Ward 54 (4) Delhi – Respondent
JUDGMENT
[Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]
Rajiv Shakdher, J. (Oral)
CM Appl.12506/2023
1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
W.P.(C) 3214/2023 & CM Appl.12505/2023[Application filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking interim relief]
2. Issue notice.
2.1. Mr Sanjay Kumar accepts notice on behalf of the respondents/revenue.
3. In view of the order that we intend to pass Mr Kumar says that no counter-affidavit is required to be filed in the matter. With the consent of the counsels for the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing and disposal, at this stage itself.
4. Via this writ petition, a challenge is laid to the notice dated 14.03.2022 issued under Section 148A(b) and the order dated 31.03.2022 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereafter referred to as the "Act"].
4.1. Besides this, a challenge is also laid to the consequential notice dated 31.03.2022 issued under Section 148 of the Act.
5. The impugned notices and order concern Assessment Year (AY) 2018- 19.
6. Mr Gaurav Gupta, learned counsel, who appears on behalf of the petitioner, says that the petitioner LLP stood dissolved on 22.02.2022.
6.1. Mr Gupta further contends
The court emphasized the importance of the Assessing Officer considering the explanation given by the petitioner and the need to establish the taxable income in the hands of the legal entities.
Notices issued in the name of a dissolved partnership firm are invalid, reaffirming the necessity for proper jurisdiction in tax assessments.
Notices issued to a dissolved partnership firm under the Income Tax Act were set aside for failure to provide requisite material to the parties, highlighting the necessity of upholding natural justic....
The court established that failure to supply information required for assessment invalidates the reassessment notice, supporting due process in tax proceedings.
A notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act is invalid if issued against a non-existent entity, confirming the need for valid recognition of a company's status post-amalgamation.
The importance of factual accuracy in the Assessing Officer's assumptions and the requirement to grant a fair opportunity for a personal hearing influenced the court's decision.
Notices issued under tax laws to a nonexistent entity are invalid; transactions must be correctly accounted for by the current entity.
Compliance with procedural requirements and the right to a fair hearing are essential in proceedings under the Income Tax Act, 1961.
The legal principle established is that in cases of disputed income and corporate mergers, the Assessing Officer must verify the exact position and issue notice to relevant parties for reexamination.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
