DELHI HIGH COURT
MANMOHAN, MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
Hardev Singh – Appellant
Versus
Income Tax Officer – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge against order under section 148a(d) (Para 1) |
| 2. allegations regarding failure to provide adequate notice time (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. income escaped assessment due to unexplained investment (Para 4) |
| 4. violation of natural justice and duty of consideration (Para 5 , 6) |
| 5. quashing of impugned order and remand for proper procedure (Para 7) |
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. (Oral):
1. Present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 29th March, 2022 passed by the Respondent under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the `Act') and proceedings initiated pursuant thereto, including the impugned notice dated 04th April, 2022 issued by the Respondent under Section 148 of the Act. Petitioner also seeks a direction restraining the Respondents from giving effect to and/or taking any step whatsoever pursuant to and/or in furtherance of the said purported order under section 148A(d) of the Act and notice under Section 148 of the Act and/or in any proceedings initiated thereunder for the Assessment Year 2018-19.
2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that Respondent issued a show cause notice dated 16th March, 2022 under Section
Section 148A(c) has been violated as it casts a duty on the Assessing Officer, by using the expression ‘shall’, to consider the reply of the Petitioner/assessee in response to notice under Section 14....
Section 148A advisedly uses the expression ‘enquiry’.
The Income Tax Officer failed to comply with mandatory response time requirements, violating the petitioner's right to due process under the Income Tax Act.
The court established that failing to consider a taxpayer's submission violates procedural fairness in tax assessments, necessitating the annulment of prior notices.
Reassessing without a hearing contravenes natural justice principles; proceedings must ensure opportunities for taxpayer representation.
Petitioners are entitled to adequate time to respond to tax notices, and minimal delays in requests for adjournments, especially for residents abroad, should not result in dismissal of rights.
Assessing Officers must consider submissions from assessee under Section 148A(d) before issuing notices under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act; failing to do so invalidates the notice.
The Assessing Officer must consider the taxpayer's reply before issuing orders under the Income Tax Act, ensuring compliance with principles of natural justice.
The court affirmed that taxpayers are entitled to adequate time to respond to notices under the Income Tax Act, and failure to consider timely responses constitutes a violation of statutory duties.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.