JUDGMENT

Ms. Ritu Bahri, J.

The petitioner-assesee has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition for issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing notice dated 01.04.2022 (P-3) passed under Section 148 -A of the INCOME TAX ACT , 1961 (for short 'Act 1961').

2. The facts as stated in the petition are that respondent No. 1 signed a notice dated 20.03.2022 (Annexure P-1) stating that he has some information in possession that certain income with respect to Assessment Year 2018-2019 has escaped assessment, within the meaning of Section 147 of Act 1961, after taking approval from respondent No. 2 on 19.03.2022.

3. A notice under Section 148 A (b) of Act 1961 was served upon the petitioner on 26.03.2022 (Annexure P-2) by respondent No. 1. This notice was in fact served on the son of the petitioner after contacting him over a phone call and obtaining email-ID. Respondent No. 1 proceeded to pass an order on 01.04.2022 (Annexure P-3) under Section 148 A (d) of Act 1961 after seeking approval from respondent No. 2. Thereafter, a notice dated 01.04.2022 (Annexure P-4) was issued to the petitioner under Section 148 of Act 1961 by respondent No. 1 and the petitioner was directed to file a return of income within 30 days from the service of the notice. Hence, the present writ petition.

Petitioner is challenging notice on the following grounds:-

(i) Firstly, the as per the amended procedure under the Finance Act, 2021, respondent No. 1 was bound to allow a minimum of 7 days to respond to the show cause notice after the same is served upon the petitioner on 26.03.2022.

(ii) Secondly, as per Section 149 (1) (b) and Section 151 of Act 1961, respondent No. 1 was not competent to conclude the proceedings against the petitioner.

(iii) Thirdly, notice had been issued on the e filing portal without any information to the petitioner. No opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner before passing of impugned notice.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to judgment of Jharkand High Court in a case of Jindal Forgings v. Income Tax Department , (2022) 143 taxmann.com wherein the application filed by the petitioner was allowed which was for seeking quashing of letter passed under Section 148 (a) (D) of the INCOME TAX ACT , 1961 whereby it has been ordered that the case of the assessee is a fit case for issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act for the assessment year. In this case, the petitioner had filed its return or income for the Assessment Year 2018-19, on 25-9-2018. The books of the petitioner were duly audited as per section 44AB of the Act. On 25-3-2022, a notice under clause (b) of Section 148 (a) of the Act was issued to the petitioner calling upon him to show-cause as to why notice under Section 148 of the Act be not issued for the reasons stated in annexure to the notice dated 25-3-2022, In this notice the petitioner was directed to ensure compliance on or before 28-3-2022. Even before lapse of seven days' time from 25-3-2022, on 31-3-2022 itself the Assessing Officer passed an order under Section 148 (a) (d) of the Act whereby inter alia it has been ordered that the case of the Assessee is a fit case for issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act for the Assessment Year 2018-19 and on 31-3-2022 itself notice has been issued.

5. Learned counsel for the respondent has referred to short reply of Manju Bala, Income Tax Officer, Ward I, Aayakar Bhawan, Sector 2, Panchkula wherein it has been stated that the Assessing Officer gave opportunity to the petitioner by issuing notice under Clause (b) of Section 148 of Act 1961 on 20.03.2022 (P-1). However, the petitioner-assessee neither filed any reply to the notice nor any application was filed seeking extension of time. Further it has been stated that the grievance of the petitioner that notice was served upon him on 26.03.2022 requiring him to response within one day i.e 27.03.2022, is without any basis, as the opportunity of being heard wa