9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (10) TMI 1441 - HC - Income TaxValidity of Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - final assessment order has been passed during the pendency of the present petition - proceedings are illegal and without jurisdiction as sanction has been granted u/s 151 in a mechanical manner - as stated by learned counsel for respondents No. 2 to 4 that the and there is an efficacious alternative remedy to prefer an appeal HELD THAT - Taking into consideration the fact that the final assessment order has already been passed on 24.03.2022, therefore, in the light of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in the case of Smt. Kamala Ojha 2019 (6) TMI 1439 - CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT the writ petition cannot be entertained wherein held when there existed reason to belief which is formed on the basis of material available having nexus with the subject, writ Court ought not to have entertained the writ petition more so when assessment orders have already been passed during pendency of the writ petition, therefore, we set aside the order passed by the writ Court and relegate the writ petitioner to prefer an appeal against the reassessment order which may be filed within a period of 30 days from today. Petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner is permitted to prefer an appeal against the reassessment order which may be filed within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. WP dismissed.
Issues:
Challenge to reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the IT Act, 1961 and notice under Section 148 on grounds of legality and jurisdiction due to mechanical sanction under Section 151. Analysis: 1. The petitioner challenged the reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147 of the IT Act, 1961 and the notice issued under Section 148, alleging that the proceedings were illegal and lacked jurisdiction due to a mechanical grant of sanction under Section 151. The petitioner sought to prevent respondent No. 4 from passing the final order until the petition's disposal. 2. The petitioner, an income tax assessee, filed returns for the assessment year 2015-16, declaring total income and claiming exemption under Section 10(38) for long-term capital gains. Respondent No. 4 issued a notice under Section 148, prompting the petitioner to request reasons recorded and approval under Section 151. Despite objections, respondent No. 4 proceeded with the reassessment. 3. Counsel for the petitioner argued that the reassessment was based on information from DDIT (Inv.), Delhi, contrary to Section 147. He contended that no inquiry under Section 131 or 133(6) was conducted, and the lack of provided sanction under Section 151 invalidated the proceedings. Reference was made to various judgments supporting these contentions. 4. Respondents' counsel countered, stating that all mandatory conditions were met in issuing the notice under Section 148. The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Raipur approved the reassessment, following standard procedures outlined by the CBDT. A final assessment order was passed, rendering the petition non-maintainable with an available remedy under Section 246A. 5. The court heard arguments from both sides and examined the documents presented. 6. The petitioner's counsel highlighted irregularities in the notice under Section 148, citing legal precedents. Respondents' counsel affirmed compliance with the law and noted the final assessment order's issuance during the petition's pendency, suggesting an appeal as an alternative remedy. 7. Reference was made to a judgment by the Hon'ble Division Bench regarding the need to raise appeals against reassessment orders instead of pursuing writ petitions post-assessment order issuance. 8. Given the final assessment order's issuance, the court, in line with the Division Bench's judgment, dismissed the petition, allowing the petitioner to file an appeal within 30 days without limitation objections. 9. The petition was dismissed, granting the petitioner the right to appeal against the reassessment order within 30 days, with freedom to raise factual and legal grounds without limitation objections. 10. The petition was ultimately dismissed with the aforementioned liberty for appeal.
|
