2020 (1) TMI 622 - HC - Income Tax

Validity of reopening of assessment - as argued Notice u/s 148 was not served on petitioner - HELD THAT - It is noticed that Mr.G.S.Selvan appeared on behalf of the petitioner and filed his authorisation. Therefore, the contention of the petitioner that the notice u/s 148 was not served on petitioner cannot be countenanced. As per Section 292BB it shall be deemed that any notice under any provision of this Act, which is required to be served upon the assessee, has been duly served upon the assessee in time in accordance with the provisions of this Act and such assessee shall be precluded from taking any objection in any proceeding or inquiry under this Act. Notice to an authorised representatives of an assessee is a notice to the assessee. In any event, the petitioner has an alternative remedy to file an appeal before the Appellate Commissioner under Section 246 against the impugned order. Hence, without going into the merits of the case, this writ petition is disposed by giving liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal under Section 246 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, within 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the Appellate Commissioner is directed to dispose the appeal in accordance with law within a period of three months thereafter.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for not being served on the petitioner.

Analysis:
The petitioner filed a writ petition against the order dated 31.03.2015, arguing that the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was not served on them. However, it was found that an authorized representative appeared on behalf of the petitioner and filed his authorization, as per the impugned order. The court noted that as per Section 292BB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, any notice required to be served upon the assessee shall be deemed to have been duly served if served on the authorized representative. Therefore, the contention that the notice was not served on the petitioner was dismissed.

Furthermore, the court highlighted that the petitioner had an alternative remedy to file an appeal before the Appellate Commissioner under Section 246 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the impugned order. Without delving into the merits of the case, the court disposed of the writ petition, granting the petitioner liberty to file an appeal within 30 days from the date of receipt of the order. The Appellate Commissioner was directed to dispose of the appeal within three months thereafter.

The registry was instructed to return the original impugned order to the petitioner's counsel, and the writ petition was disposed of without any costs. The connected miscellaneous petition was also closed as a consequence of the judgment.