9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 1485X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... applied only in terms of the amendment to Section 142A of the IT Act which was introduced by the Finance Act of 2004, retrospectively. Therefore, at the relevant point of time when the impugned notices under Section 148 were issued against the writ petitioner in respect of the assessment years 1999-2000 and 2000-2001, only the un-amended Section 142A of the IT Act applied. The unamended Section 142A ought to be read in conjunction with the law applicable at the relevant point of time In Re: Amiya Bala Paul (2003 (7) TMI 4 - SUPREME Court ). This Court must also concur with the stand taken by the writ petitioner that since the assessment year 1999-2000 and 2000-2001 became final prior to 30th September, 2004, i.e. the introduction of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ettled by the Hon ble Apex Court in the matter of Amiya Bala Paul vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in 2003 (262) ITR 407 (SC). The said judgment was delivered on 7th July, 2003 and, Sri Biswas submits that the said judgment was brought to the notice of the respondent No.1/ITO by the petitioner vide her letter dated 10th March, 2004. Such position of law was ignored by the ITO and the ITO proceeded with the impugned notices against the petitioner on the ground that the valuation for constructing her residential property remained an unexplained investment in her returns. Sri Biswas submits that the ITO arrived at such conclusion only after referring the matter to the Departmental Valuation Officer who, according to the ITO, is empow ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... refer the valuation of any house property to the Departmental Valuation Officer. However, ignoring such statutory position, the ITO added a purported unexplained investment of ₹ 5,48,514/- qua the petitioner for the assessment year 2001-2002. Sri Biswas points out that such arbitrary addition to the assessment qua the petitioner for the assessment year 2001-2002, was challenged by the petitioner in an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) (for short the CIT (Appeal). The CIT (Appeal) by his order dated 30th July, 2004 deleted the additional assessment made by the ITO for the assessment year 2001-2002 against which the Revenue preferred an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short ITAT). The ITAT, b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ter before the ITAT. Only the order of the ITAT can be carried before this Hon ble Court by way of a further appeal. Therefore, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed in limine. Sri Nizamuddin further argues that it would be evident from the contents of the writ petition itself that the principles of natural justice have been complied with by the Revenue and the petitioner received an adequate opportunity to place her objections. Since, only notices have been issued against the writ petitioner, considering the law laid down in Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officers Ors. reported in 236 ITR 34 (SC), this Court, sitting in writ jurisdiction, should not interfere at the notice stage. Post the stage of notice the assessing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. Chhabil Dass Agarwal reported in 2014 (1) SCC 603 = Laws (SC)-2013-8-23. Having heard the parties and considering the materials placed, this Court finds that on behalf of the Revenue the primary argument placed is that of jurisdiction. The point of jurisdiction, in the opinion of this Court, is answered in favour of the writ petitioner since the writ petitioner has demonstrated that the law prevailing at the material point of time In Re: Amiya Bala Paul (supra) ought to have been applied by the ITO. The relevant note of In Re: Amiya Bala Paul reads as follows:- In an assessment of the assessee to income-tax, the Assessing Officer cannot refer to the Valuation Officer the question of the cost of construction of a house property bu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the valuation officer can be applied only in terms of the amendment to Section 142A of the IT Act which was introduced by the Finance Act of 2004, retrospectively. Therefore, at the relevant point of time when the impugned notices under Section 148 were issued against the writ petitioner in respect of the assessment years 1999-2000 and 2000-2001, only the un-amended Section 142A of the IT Act applied. The unamended Section 142A ought to be read in conjunction with the law applicable at the relevant point of time In Re: Amiya Bala Paul (supra). This Court must also concur with the stand taken by the writ petitioner that since the assessment year 1999-2000 and 2000-2001 became final prior to 30th September, 2004, i.e. the introduction o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
