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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 47908

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A., J
SAVITHRIAMMA PARAMESWARAN PILLAI – Appellant
Versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 23022 OF 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.ASWIN GOPAKUMAR, SRI.ANWIN GOPAKUMAR, SHRI.ADITYA VENUGOPALAN, SHRI.MAHESH CHANDRAN, SMT.SARANYA BABU, SHRI.ABHISHEK S., SMT.ANJANA A., SMT.GOPIKA B.S., SHRI.ROHIT P.
For the Respondents: SHRI. JOSE JOSEPH, SC

Prior notice under Sec.148A is not required if exceptions apply under income tax law.

Headnote:The petitioner challenges the notice issued under Sec.148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for lack of prior notice as per Sec.148A. The court finds that the case falls under the exception to the prior notice requirement and no interference is warranted. The petition is dismissed, maintaining the petitioner's right to contest the proceedings.

Table of Content
1. petitioner challenges notice under sec.148. (Para 1)
2. arguments regarding requirement of prior notice. (Para 2 , 3)
3. court observes applicability of exceptions under law. (Para 4 , 5 , 6)
4. legal reasoning for dismissal. (Para 7)

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is an assessee under Income Tax Act, 1961 and is aggrieved by Ext.P3 notice issued by the respondents under Sec.148 of the . The challenge was raised by the petitioner mainly on the ground that, despite the fact that Sec.148A of the Income Tax Act, contemplates for a prior notice to the petitioner/assessee before issuing a notice under Sec.148, such procedure has not been adopted in this case. It was in these circumstances, this writ petition was filed, seeking following reliefs:-

“For these and other grounds to be urged at the time of hearing, it is most humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to call for records leading to Ext. P1 to Ext. P3 and:

i. issue a writ of certiorari or such other appropriate writ, direction or order and quash Exhibit P3 notice dated 29.03.2025 issued by the Respondent; and ii. to grant such other and incidental reliefs as this Hon’ble court may deem fit, just and necessary in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case; and iii. to allow this Writ Petition (civil) with costs to the Petitioner.”

2. I have heard Sri. Aswin Gopakumar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. Jose Joseph, the learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondents.

3. With respect to the contentions raised by the petitioner in the writ petition, it was submitted by the learned Standing counsel for the respondents that, as far as the issuance of prior notice under Sec.148A of the Income Tax Act is concerned, the same was not necessary in the case of the petitioner, as it falls under the proviso contemplated under Sec.148A of the Act, which deals with the circumstances in which the provisions of 148A would not be applicable. The learned standing Counsel brought the attention of this Court to the statutory stipulations contained in Sec.148A, which stood prior to the amendment as per the Finance Act 2024 with effect from 01.09.2024. Sec.148A prior to 01.09.2024 reads as follows.

“148A. The Assessing Officer shall, before issuing any notice under section 148,—

(a) conduct any enquiry, if required, with the prior approval of specified authority, with respect to the information which suggests that the income charge-able to tax has escaped assessment;

(b) provide an opportunity of being heard to the assessee, with the prior approval of specified authority, by serving upon him a notice to show cause within such time, as may be specified in the notice, being not less than seven days and but not exceeding thirty days from the date on which such notice is issued, or such time, as may be extended by him on the basis of an application in this behalf, as to why a notice under section 148 should not be issued on the basis of information which suggests that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment in his case for the relevant assessment year and results of enquiry conducted, if any, as per clause (a)

(c) consider the reply of assessee furnished, if any, in response to the show-cause notice referred to in clause (b);

(d) decide, on the basis of material available on record including reply of the assessee, whether or not it is a fit case to issue a notice under section 148, by passing an order, with the prior approval of specified authority, within one month from the end of the month in which the reply referred to in clause (c) is received by him, or where no such reply is furnished, within one month from the end of the month in which time or extended time allowed to furnish a reply as per clause (b) expires:

Provided that the provisions of this section shall not apply in a case where,—

(a) a search is initiated under section 132 or books of account, other documents or any assets are requisitioned under section 132A in the case of

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top