IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Manmohan, Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, JJ.
Concept Studio (India) Private Limited - Appellant
Versus
Income Tax Department - Respondent
W.P.(C) 14897 of 2022
Decided On : 20-10-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to tax order under section 148a(d) (Para 1) |
| 2. petitioner's argument on non-supply of documents (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. respondent's concession to set aside the order (Para 5) |
| 4. court's directive for re-assessment with provided documents (Para 6) |
| 5. order for disposal of the writ petition (Para 7) |
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J.
C.M.No.45768/2022
Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) No.14897/2022 & C.M.No.45767/2022
1. Present writ petition has been filed challenging the order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [`the Act'] and the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act both dated 27th July, 2022 for the Assessment Year 2013-14.
2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the impugned order dated 27th July, 2022 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act is a nonspeaking order that does not discuss any of the contentions raised by the Petitioner. He states that the Petitioner in its reply dated 06th June, 2022 informed the Respondents that the sale deed supplied by the Respondents as part of the information was a `corrupt file' which did not open in the petitioner's computer system. Petitioner also requested the Respondents to re-supply the same along with the other information and material on the basis of which the re-assessment proceedings were sought to be initiated. He emphasises that the said documents were never supplied to the Petitioner.
3. He further states that in the order passed under Section 148A(d), the only contention of the Petitioner that was noted was that the Petitioner had not been supplied with the sale deed along with the show cause notice. However, the order merely goes on to state that the reply of the Petitioner was not found to be tenable.
4. Issue notice. Mr.Shray Nargotra, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the Respondents-Revenue.
5. He, on instructions, states that the Assessing Officer has no objection if the order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act as well as the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act are set aside. He assures and undertakes to this Court that the sale deed as well as the other relevant information/material shall be furnished to the Petitioner within two weeks.
6. Keeping in view the aforesaid, the present writ petition is allowed and the impugned order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act as well as the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act, both dated 27th July, 2022, for the Assessment Year 2013-14 are set aside. The Respondents are directed to supply the relevant information/material to the Petitioner including a copy of the sale deed within two weeks. The Assessing Officer is directed to decide the matter afresh and pass a reasoned order under Section 148A(d) of the Act within four weeks thereafter.
7. Accordingly, the present writ petition along with pending application stands disposed of. The rights and contentions of all the parties are left open.
The issuance of a reassessment notice must adhere to principles of natural justice, including consideration of all relevant submissions by the assessee.
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.
Court emphasized that reassessment notices must consider all disclosures made by the taxpayer, reaffirming the principle of natural justice when reviewing prior returns.
A petitioner can challenge proceedings based on incorrect factual assumptions about income tax return filings, and the Assessing Officer must respond appropriately to rebuttals presented.
Administrative orders can be set aside by courts if found to be flawed in execution, ensuring rectification of inaccuracies in legal processes.
Section 148A advisedly uses the expression ‘enquiry’.
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.
Orders based on vague allegations without specific details violate the right to a fair hearing under tax law.
Notices under Income Tax Act must contain clear allegations to allow adequate defense, failing which they may be set aside.
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.