Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
MANMOHAN, MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
Indure Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to order under income tax act (Para 1) |
| 2. procedure for objections to notices (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 3. responses from respondents on document legitimacy (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. application of principles of natural justice (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 5. dismissal of writ petition (Para 10) |
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. (Oral)
C.M.Nos.29717/2022 & 29719/2022
Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Accordingly, the applications stand disposed of.
W.P.(C) No.10307/2022 & C.M.No.29718/2022
1. Present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 29th June, 2022 passed by the Respondent No. 2 under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the `Act') and notice dated 30th June, 2022 issued by the Respondent No.2 under Section 148 of the Act for the Assessment Year 2013-14. Petitioner also seeks a direction to the Respondent No. 2 to reopen the income tax portal of the Petitioner Company and allow it three working days to file a reply to the show cause notice dated 20th May, 2022 and to restrain the Respondents from continuing any proceedings in pursuance to impugned order dated 29th June, 2022 and impugned notice dated 30th June, 2022 during
Natural justice principles are flexible, requiring case-specific application, and a prima facie case of income escapement justifies reopening assessments.
The failure to share material information in tax proceedings leads to a violation of the right to a fair hearing, necessitating the quashing of related orders.
Orders based on vague allegations without specific details violate the right to a fair hearing under tax law.
Reassessing without a hearing contravenes natural justice principles; proceedings must ensure opportunities for taxpayer representation.
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.
Reassessment orders under the Income Tax Act must provide specific details regarding allegations to ensure due process and procedural fairness.
The Court affirmed that vague show cause notices issued under Section 148A(b) lack compliance with natural justice, necessitating clear material for Assessee responses.
Assessing Officers must provide specific details in notices for effective response by Assessee, adhering to principles of natural justice.
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.
The court held that the Assessing Officer's failure to consider the petitioner's detailed replies before passing the reassessment order violated procedural justice under the Income Tax Act.
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
