Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
MANMOHAN, MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
Pankaj Saini – Appellant
Versus
Income Tax Officer – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to notice under section 148 of the act. (Para 1) |
| 2. petitioner's claim regarding lack of recorded reasons. (Para 2) |
| 3. court's directive for assessing officer's presence and explanation of show cause notices. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 4. setting aside of initial notice and allowance for second notice. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 5. writ petition disposed with rights of parties left open. (Para 7) |
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. (Oral)--Present writ petition has been filed challenging the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short `Act') dated 31st March, 2021 as well as the assessment order passed under Section 147 of the Act for the Assessment Year 2017-18 and the demand notice issued under Section 156 of the Act dated 31st March, 2022.
2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the impugned notice dated 31st March, 2021 has not been preceded by recording of reasons to believe that there has been escapement of income for the Assessment Year 2017-18, which is a mandatory requirement for issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act. He states that the upon perusal of the copy of the reasons to believe for re-opening of assessment, which was provided on 22nd
The court established that failing to consider a taxpayer's submission violates procedural fairness in tax assessments, necessitating the annulment of prior notices.
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.
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.
The assessing officer is bound to dispose of the objections filed by the noticee before proceeding with the assessment after issuing a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act.
Reassessing without a hearing contravenes natural justice principles; proceedings must ensure opportunities for taxpayer representation.
The assessing officer must dispose of objections to a Section 148 notice with a speaking order before further assessment proceedings can continue.
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.
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.
The main legal point established is that the delay in issuance of a notice beyond the limitation period and the inchoate nature of a digitally signed notice can lead to the quashing of the notice and....
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
