2023 (6) TMI 1454 - HC - Income Tax

Reopening of assessment - mandamus directing the conduct of enquiry on the petitioner's representation and dropping all further proceedings as against the petitioner on the basis of the notices issued by the official respondents under the provisions of the Income Tax Act - HELD THAT - As the petitioner appears to have suffered orders u/s 148A(d) that have attained finality and is also in receipt of notices u/s 148 of the Act, it is for it to cooperate with the proceedings initiated by the Department and take matters to a logical conclusion, in accordance with law. As submitted notices have been issued continuously and repeatedly to the petitioner but there has been no response from his side. It is incumbent on the part of the petitioner to appear before the Officer and put forth any explanation that he may have in regard to the issues raised by the Department including the transactions as noticed in the preceding paragraphs that have been conducted utilising his pan number. Mandamus of the nature as sought for cannot be granted in a case such as this which involves appreciation of various disputed facts. It is to be noted that in matters relating to assessment, filing of a representation is of no avail as the petitioner is duty bound to respond to notices, appear before the officer and tender his explanations. The prayer for mandamus is rejected, and this Writ Petition is dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Petitioner seeks mandamus for enquiry on representation and dropping proceedings under Income Tax Act for specified financial years.

Analysis:
The petitioner, an individual, filed a petition seeking a mandamus directing an enquiry based on a representation and dropping of proceedings under the Income Tax Act for the financial years 2017-2018 to 2020-2021. The petitioner received notices under Section 148A(b) and an order under Section 148A(d) of the Act. However, it was unclear whether these proceedings covered all the financial years mentioned in the petition as the notices and orders provided were only for some of the years. The petitioner also sought clarifications from Punjab National Bank regarding transactions related to his PAN number, which the Bank addressed in a letter stating that the accounts in question were not connected to the petitioner's PAN number.

The Court noted that factual aspects, such as transactions and connections with bank accounts, cannot be examined under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner had received final orders under Section 148A(d) and notices under Section 148 of the Act, indicating the need to cooperate with the Department's proceedings and bring the matter to a logical conclusion in accordance with the law. The Standing Counsel highlighted that despite continuous notices, the petitioner had not responded, emphasizing the petitioner's duty to provide explanations and cooperate with the assessment process.

The Court held that a mandamus could not be granted in this case due to the involvement of disputed facts, emphasizing that in assessment matters, filing a representation is insufficient, and the petitioner must respond to notices, appear before the officer, and provide explanations. Consequently, the prayer for mandamus was rejected, and the writ petition was dismissed. The petitioner was directed to appear in response to notices, cooperate with the Department, and allow the assessment proceedings to proceed as per the law, with no costs imposed.