DELHI HIGH COURT
MANMOHAN, MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
Schneider Electric India Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to income tax show cause notice. (Para 1) |
| 2. arguments related to procedural violations. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's observations on remand. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. order to remand case for fresh decision. (Para 9) |
| 5. conclusion and disposal of petition. (Para 10) |
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. (Oral)--Present writ petition has been filed challenging the show cause notice dated 15th March, 2022 issued under section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short `Act'), order dated 31st March, 2022 issued under Section 148A(d) and the notice dated 31st March, 2022 issued under section 148 of the Act for the Assessment Year 2018-19.
2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that in terms of the "information" available with the Respondent No 1, it has been alleged that the Petitioner's claim for IGST Refund was incorrect and hence, the said amount "is required to be disallowed". He states that an IGST Refund, being a balance sheet item, is not a claim made in the profit and loss account and by no stretch of imagination can the same be termed as "income chargeable to tax having escaped assessment" and hence, in terms of Section 147 of the Act as well as the first p
Show cause notices challenging tax claims must adhere to natural justice principles, and IGST Refund claims do not qualify as chargeable income under income tax laws.
Violation of principles of natural justice and non-application of mind led to the setting aside of the impugned order and remand of the matter for a fresh decision.
The failure of the Assessing Officer to consider the petitioner's reply before issuing an order under Section 148A(d) constitutes a breach of natural justice, invalidating the order.
Section 148A advisedly uses the expression ‘enquiry’.
Orders based on vague allegations without specific details violate the right to a fair hearing under tax law.
The court established that failing to consider a taxpayer's submission violates procedural fairness in tax assessments, necessitating the annulment of prior notices.
Second notice under Section 148A(b) is invalid when an initial notice under Section 148 has already been served; Supreme Court directions pertain to a different timeframe and do not apply.
A show cause notice under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act must contain specific allegations of income escapement; its absence renders the assessment invalid.
Reassessing without a hearing contravenes natural justice principles; proceedings must ensure opportunities for taxpayer representation.
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....
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.