SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Manmohan, Dinesh Kumar Sharma, JJ.
MM9 International - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 6775 of 2022 & CM Appls. 20588-20589 of 2022
Decided On : 29-04-2022




Notice issued without granting statutory time to respond violated the principles of natural justice, rendering the order invalid.

Headnote:(A) Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 148A(b) and 148A(d) - Challenge to order for not complying with statutory time limit - Petitioner contended that Respondent did not provide the mandatory seven-day period to respond to the notice under Section 148A(b) before issuing an order under Section 148A(d) - Court found that the impugned order violated the time period and principles of natural justice. (Paras 2-8)

(B) Natural Justice - The principle requires a fair opportunity for parties to be heard before any adverse decision is made against them - Respondent failed to grant sufficient time for filing a response, rendering the order invalid. (Para 8)

Facts of the case:
The writ petition challenged a notice issued on 2nd April 2022 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act without providing the Petitioner the statutory time to respond as required by Section 148A(b).

Findings of Court:
The court set aside the order and notice issued on 2nd April 2022 and directed the reopening of the portal for the Petitioner to file a response within three days, with a decision required within four weeks.

Issues: The main questions were whether the Respondent had adhered to the statutory time limits for filing replies, and if the principles of natural justice were followed.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the statutory requirement for a response period cannot be ignored and that violating this provision undermines fair procedure and the legitimacy of the order.

Result: The impugned order and notice dated 2nd April 2022 were set aside.

Table of Content
1. violation of statutory time limits. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. impugned order violated natural justice. (Para 8)
3. order to reopen portal and decide matter. (Para 9)
4. writ petition disposed with directions. (Para 10)

JUDGMENT

Manmohan, J. (Oral)--Present writ petition has been filed challenging the order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short `Act') and the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act dated 2nd April, 2022.

2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that Respondent No.2, without granting the minimum statutory time of seven days prescribed under Section 148A(b), had passed the order under Section 148A(d) of the Act and issued notice under Section 148 of the Act both dated 2nd April, 2022.

3. He states that Respondent No.2 issued a show cause notice under Section 148A(b) (digitally signed on 23rd March, 2022 at 11:46 PM), which was received by the Petitioner vide e-mail on 23rd March, 2022 at 11:52 PM.

4. He states that vide the said show cause notice, Respondent No.2 had directed the Petitioner to file its reply by 29th March, 2022. He states that the Petitioner attempted to file its reply on 30th March, 2022, however, the Portal did not permit filing of the reply, as Respondent No.2 had fixed the time limit for filing reply on the portal by 29th March, 2022.

5. He submits that Respondent No.2 erred in not following the mandatory requirement of granting not less than seven days but not more than thirty days opportunity to the assessee to file its explanation under Section 148A(b) of the Act.

6. Issue notice.

7. Mr. Sanjay Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents accepts notice.

8. Keeping in view the averments in the writ petition, this Court is of the view that the impugned order has been passed not only in violation of the time period stipulated under Section 148A(b) of the Act but also in violation of the principles of natural justice.

9. Consequently, the impugned order and notice dated 2nd April, 2022 is set aside and the respondent is directed to reopen the portal to enable the petitioner to file its response to the notice dated 23rd March, 2022 within three days of opening of the portal. The respondent is also directed to decide the matter in accordance with law within four weeks thereafter.

10. With the aforesaid direction, the present writ petition and applications stand disposed of.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top