9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (4) TMI 839 - HC - Income TaxValidity of reopening of assessment u/s 147 - shorter period to reply to notice - effectively only six working days were given to reply and hence Petitioner was unable to file a reply - as argued that if Petitioner is given an opportunity to reply to the notice u/s 148A(b) she is confident that she will be able to satisfy the AO that the notice u/s 148A(b) will have to be dropped - HELD THAT - Considering the facts and circumstances of the case that Petitioner is a Public Trust and running a school in our view Petitioner should be given an opportunity to reply to the notice. In the circumstances without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter we hereby quash and set aside the impugned order passed u/s 148A(d) of the Act and remand the matter for de novo consideration. The consequent notice dated 25th March 2022 u/s 148 of the Act also hereby quashed and set aside. Within four weeks of this order being uploaded Petitioner shall reply to the notice issued u/s 148A(b) - To the reply Petitioner may also annex documents which have to be taken into account while deciding the matter.
Issues involved: Challenge to order under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act and notice under Section 148, time given for response, opportunity to reply, quashing of impugned order, remand for de novo consideration, disposal of notice, exclusion of time period.
The High Court of Bombay considered a petition challenging an order dated 23rd March 2022 issued under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act and a consequential notice dated 25th March 2022 under Section 148 of the Act. The petitioner had not replied to the notice dated 11th March 2022 issued under Section 148A(b) of the Act within the given timeframe. It was argued that the short period provided for response, due to weekends, hindered the petitioner from filing a reply. The petitioner sought an opportunity to respond, expressing confidence in satisfying the Assessing Officer to drop the notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act. The Court acknowledged the petitioner's status as a Public Trust running a school and deemed it appropriate to grant an opportunity to reply to the notice dated 11th March 2022. Without delving into the merits of the case, the Court quashed the order dated 23rd March 2022 under Section 148A(d) of the Act and the consequential notice dated 25th March 2022 under Section 148, remanding the matter for fresh consideration. Furthermore, the Court directed the petitioner to respond to the notice dated 11th March 2022 within four weeks, allowing for the submission of relevant documents. The respondents were instructed to dispose of the notice within six weeks after the petitioner's reply. Emphasizing the need for a reasoned order addressing all submissions and granting a personal hearing, the Court specified a notice period of at least five working days before the hearing. The period from 11th March 2022 until the issuance of the fresh order under Section 148A(d) of the Act was deemed excluded when calculating the prescribed time period under Sections 149 and 151 of the Act. Ultimately, the petition was disposed of by the Court, providing a clear directive for the parties involved in the matter.
|
