Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.
Nalinaksha Sarma, S/o- Lt. L.K. Sarma – Appellant
Versus
The Union Of India and 4 Ors. – Respondents
WP(C) 362 of 2023
Decided on : 21-11-2024
(A) Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 148A(b), 148A(d), 149(1)(a), 149(1)(b) - Challenge to notice issued under Section 148A(b) for assessment year 2015-16 - Notice issued on 15.03.2022 was found to be barred by limitation as the period for issuing notice under Section 148 expired on 31.03.2019 - The court emphasized the necessity of providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner to respond to the notice, which was not granted in this case - The order dated 31.03.2022 and the notice under Section 148 were set aside and quashed, allowing the petitioner to raise objections during the hearing. (Paras 18, 19, 20, 21)
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. D. Upamanya, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner. Mr. S.C. Keyal, the learned Standing Counsel appears on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5.
2. The present writ petition has been filed challenging the notice dated 15.03.2022 issued under Section 148A (b) of the Income Tax Act 1961, for short (‘the Act of 1961’); the order dated 31.03.2022 passed under Section 148A (d) of the Act of 1961, as well as all consequential actions in pursuance to the order dated 31.03.2022.
3. From the materials on record, it appears that on 15.03.2022, a notice was issued under section 148A (b) of the Act of 1961, asking the petitioner to show cause as to why a notice under Section 148 of the Act of 1961 should not be issued in view of the details contained in Annexure A to the said notice dated 15.03.2022. It is pertinent to mention that the said notice was issued in connection to the Assessment Year 2015-16.
4. A perusal of Annexure A to the said notice dated the 15.03.2022, reveals that information were gathered from the inside portal for the financial year 2014-15, that there were various deposits in the form of TDS statement, time deposit as well as deposit in cash. It further revealed from such information to the Assessing Officer that the income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment for the Assessment year 2015-16, and as such the petitioner was asked to show cause.
5. On 19.03.2022 the petitioner upon receipt of the said notice dated 15.03.2022, submitted a communication on 25.03.2022 and informed the Assessing Officer that since 20.03.2022 was a Sunday, the petitioner applied for the relevant bank statements, FD statements and TDS statements only on 21.03.2022 and the Bank Officials had sought for two weeks time to provide the said documents. Under such circumstances, vide the said communication, the petitioner requested a further 2(two) weeks time so that he could submit an effective reply. The petitioner thereupon received messages from the Income Tax department intimating that the petitioner had to submit his reply on or before 31.03.2022.
6. The records further reveal that as the petitioner did not submit a reply on or before 31.03.2022, the order was passed under Section 148A (d) of the Act of 1961, wherein it was categorically mentioned that as the assesse failed to submit the reply on 25.03.2022 and income had escaped assessment amounting to Rs. 78,59,057/- (Rupees Seventy Eight Lakh Fifty Nine Thousand Fifty Seven) for the Assessment year 2015-16, the Assessing Officer i.e. the respondent No.3 was of the opinion that it was a fit case for issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act of 1961.
7. It is the further case of the petitioner that the petitioner received the details from the banks only on 06.04.2022 and 25.04.2022 and thereupon submitted a reply on 20.05.2022. However, the said was not taken into consideration and the Respondent Authorities proceeded with the reassessment proceedings and as such the petitioner is before this Court.
8. Upon filing of the writ petition, it appears from the records that this Court by an order dated 30.01.2023, issued notice and further stayed the proceedings initiated by the Income Tax Department against the petitioner in connection with the notice under Section 142(1) dated 21.12.2022. The said interim order had been extended from time to time.
9. The record further reveals that an affidavit-in-opposition was filed by the respondent Nos. 2 to 5 on 05.09.2024. From a perusal of the said affidavit-in-opposition, it shows that the Assessing Officer taking into account that the proceedings were getting time barred in view for the Assessment year 2015-16, the last date for issuance of the Notice under Section 148 of the Act of 1961 being 31.03.2022, no adjournment was granted to the request made on 25.03.2022 by the petitioner.
10. In the backdrop of the above pleadings this Court has heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the par
The issuance of notice under Section 148A(b) was barred by limitation, violating the requirement for a reasonable opportunity to respond.
The issuance of notice under section 148 was ruled invalid as it was beyond the limitation period specified under the previous regime, making the reassessment void ab initio under Income Tax Act.
provisions of Section 149(1) of the Act of 1961 are plain and unambiguous. Bare reading of clause (a) of sub-section (1) of Section 149 leaves no manner of doubt that normal period of limitation for ....
Notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act beyond the limitation period are illegal and void, leading to the quashing of all consequential orders.
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
