9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
The judgment involves the maintainability of a writ petition filed to challenge a notice issued under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the availability of alternative remedies under the Act. Analysis of Judgment: Issue 1: Maintainability of Writ Petition The appellant filed a writ petition seeking to quash a notice issued under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The writ petition was dismissed by the single judge citing reasons that there was no infirmity in the assessment order passed by the Tribunal and that an alternative remedy was available to the appellant under the Income-tax Act. The Income-tax Department raised an objection on the maintainability of the writ petition against the notice issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax under section 148 of the Act. The appellant requested the copy of reasons recorded for reopening the assessment, but the court held that the appellant had no legal right to ask for reasons under section 147 of the Act. The court found that the appellant wrongly invoked the jurisdiction of the court as the notice was issued under section 148 of the Act, and the appellant had an alternative remedy of filing an appropriate appeal under the Income-tax Act, 1961. Issue 2: Jurisdiction under Sections 147 and 148 of the Act The court examined sections 147, 148, and 151 of the Income-tax Act. Section 147 deals with income escaping assessment, allowing the Assessing Officer to assess or reassess such income that has escaped assessment. Section 148 pertains to the issue of notice where income has escaped assessment, and section 151 deals with the sanction for issuing notices under sections 147 and 148. The court noted that the Income-tax Officer had reason to believe that there was escaped assessment and had obtained the necessary sanction under section 151. The court rejected the arguments of the appellant's counsel regarding sections 147 and 148, emphasizing that the appellant had no legal right to request reasons for the notice under section 147 and should have filed a reply immediately. Conclusion: The court dismissed the writ petition as not maintainable since it was filed against the notice of reassessment. However, the dismissal did not prevent the appellant from raising legal contentions by replying to the notice under section 147 along with the return. The Income-tax Officer was directed to decide on the objections filed within three months from the date of filing objections regarding reassessment proceedings.
|
