SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img



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




A non-speaking order in reassessment proceedings violates due process; the authority must supply necessary documents to ensure fairness.

Headnote:(A) Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 148 and 148A(d) - Challenge to a non-speaking order regarding reassessment proceedings - The Petitioner contended that the order failed to address their arguments and lacked proper disclosure from the Respondents - Respondents agreed to set aside the order and provide necessary documents. (Paras 1-6)

(B) Writ Jurisdiction - A writ of mandamus can issue to compel an authority to act, and it was emphasized that proper procedures must be followed in reassessment. (Paras 1-6)

Facts of the case:
The writ petition was filed to challenge an order under Section 148A(d), asserting that the Respondents did not provide the necessary sale deed as part of the reassessment process and issued a non-speaking order.

Findings of Court:
The petition was allowed, and the impugned order and notice were set aside, mandating the supply of relevant information to the Petitioner, followed by a fresh decision by the Assessing Officer.

Issues: Addressing the validity of the non-speaking order and ensuring procedural fairness in the reassessment process.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Assessing Officer's failure to supply necessary documents compromised the legality of the re-assessment process, warranting a fresh order.

Result: Writ petition allowed; orders set aside.

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.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top