9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (12) TMI 127 - SC - Income TaxValidity of reopening of assessment - delay in issuance of notices - High Court 2023 (7) TMI 1504 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT refused to entertain the writ petition filed by the appellant herein under Article 226 of the Constitution of India relegating the appellant to the alternative remedy under the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 - HELD THAT - As in Union of India Ors. Vs. Rajeev Bansal 2024 (10) TMI 264 - SUPREME COURT (LB) wherein a three Judge Bench of this Court headed by the then Hon ble the Chief Justice of India, relegated the matters to the Assessing Officer for the purpose of considering the question of delay in issuance of notices impugned in those cases u/s 148 and/or other provisions of the I.T. Act, 1961, which were deemed to have been issued under the amended Section 148-A(b) in terms of the order of this Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Ashish Agarwal 2022 (5) TMI 240 - SUPREME COURT Thus while applying the dictum of this Court in the case of Rajeev Bansal, referred to above, we think it just and proper to quash the final Assessment Order dated 22.05.2023 only for the purpose of enabling the appellant herein to take up all objections and contentions vis-a-vis the impugned notices. It is needless to observe that the concerned AO shall consider the objections and contentions of the appellant herein vis-a-vis the impugned notices and pass a fresh order in accordance with law.
Issues:
1. Refusal by the High Court to entertain a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 2. Relegation of the appellant to alternative remedy under the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. Consideration of recent judgment by the Supreme Court in a similar matter. 4. Request to set aside the final Assessment Order and reconsideration by the Assessing Officer. 5. Disagreement on quashing the notices and giving an opportunity to the appellant. 6. Decision of the Supreme Court to quash the final Assessment Order for enabling the appellant to raise objections. 7. Direction for the Assessing Officer to consider objections and pass a fresh order. 8. Setting aside of the High Court order dated 11.07.2023 and allowing the appeal. 9. Liberty granted to the appellant to seek remedies if aggrieved by the fresh Assessment Order. Analysis: The Supreme Court addressed the issue of the High Court's refusal to entertain a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, relegating the appellant to the alternative remedy under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Court considered a recent judgment where a three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court had relegated matters to the Assessing Officer for considering the delay in issuance of notices under the Income Tax Act. The Court noted that the appellant sought to set aside the final Assessment Order and requested reconsideration by the Assessing Officer, while the Additional Solicitor General disagreed with quashing the notices at that stage. However, applying the precedent set in the mentioned judgment, the Court decided to quash the final Assessment Order to allow the appellant to raise objections before the Assessing Officer. The Supreme Court clarified that the Assessing Officer must consider the objections and contentions of the appellant regarding the impugned notices and pass a fresh order in accordance with the law. Consequently, the Court set aside the High Court's order dated 11.07.2023, allowed the appeal, and did not impose any costs. The Court further granted the appellant the liberty to seek remedies if aggrieved by the fresh Assessment Order to be passed by the Assessing Officer. This comprehensive analysis demonstrates how the Supreme Court addressed each issue raised by the parties, considered relevant precedents, and provided a clear direction for the Assessing Officer to handle the matter in accordance with the law.
|
