2022 (5) TMI 421 - HC - Income Tax

Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - revenue rejecting the objections taken by petitioner on the matter concerning issue of notice under Section 148 - respondent no. 4 has passed the impugned order held Hon'ble Allahabad High Court has quashed such notices issued u/s 148 on or after 01.04.2021. But the Department has filed SLP before Hon'ble Supreme Court on this issue. Therefore, till the outcome of the issue pending before Hon'ble Court, it cannot be said that the notice is not valid - HELD THAT - As the aforequoted observation made by the respondent no. 4 in the impugned order dated 19.3.2022, prima facie, appears to be highly contemptuous, whimsical and against all settled principles of propriety and law. Apart from above, the impugned order, prima facie, appears to be misleading inasmuch as in the impugned order, the respondent no. 4 has deliberately not disclosed 'sent time stamp' reports which is always available with the department. That apart, as per reports being filed before this Court by means of counter affidavits and to be precise in Writ Tax appeal there is 'Income Tax Business Application Technical Team' which used to give the date and time of (i) generation of notice, (ii) digital signing in ITBA by AO, and (iii) triggering of e-mail. These details are also totally lacking in the impugned order. Under the circumstances, we direct the respondent no. 4 to file a personal affidavit of an officer of the Centre not below the rank of Additional Commissioner of Income Tax to explain the things as noted above and file copies of 'sent time stamp' and reports of Income Tax Business Application Technical Team, within three days. Put up as a fresh case on 21.4.2022 at 10 00 AM.

Summary

Issues:
Challenging the order rejecting objections to notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act and seeking quashing of the notice and sanction for reassessment of income for A.Y. 2013-14.

Analysis:
The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking to quash the order rejecting objections to the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act and the connected proceedings for reassessment of income for the relevant assessment year. The petitioner had previously filed a similar petition, which was disposed of with directions for the Assessing Authority to decide the objection against the notice in accordance with the law. However, the respondent no. 4 passed an impugned order rejecting the objections, citing a pending issue before the Supreme Court regarding the validity of notices issued after a specific date. The court found the respondent's observation contemptuous and against established legal principles.

The court noted that the impugned order appeared misleading as it did not disclose crucial details such as the 'sent time stamp' reports, which are typically available with the department. Additionally, the order lacked essential information provided by the Income Tax Business Application Technical Team regarding the generation of the notice, digital signing, and triggering of the email. The court directed the respondent no. 4 to submit a personal affidavit from an officer not below the rank of Additional Commissioner of Income Tax to clarify these discrepancies and provide the necessary reports within three days.

In conclusion, the court scheduled a fresh hearing for further examination of the matter on a specified date. The judgment emphasizes the importance of transparency and adherence to procedural requirements in tax matters, highlighting the need for accurate documentation and compliance with legal standards to ensure fair and just proceedings.