9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (3) TMI 11X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ievance before the concerned authority. This is not a fit case nor should this court entertain the writ petition against a show cause notice issued on May 31, 2001 in the year 2003. - - - - - Dated:- 20-3-2003 - Judge(s) : PRAKASH TATIA. JUDGMENT Prakash Tatia J. -Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was served with a notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on May 31, 2001. According to the petitioner, as per section 151 of the Act it is obligatory upon the Assessing Officer to record reasons to the effect that it is a fit case for the issue of such notice under section 148. As per sub-section (2) of section 151 unless a satisfaction is recorded over reasons re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... w cause notice apart from the delay in challenging the show cause notice after more than about 22 months. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the reasons for issuing notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act were supplied to the petitioner on May 31, 2001, copy of which is placed on record as annexure 4, and therefore, now the petitioner has come to know that the reasons for issuing notice itself contains that the approval of the Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, Range-2, has been accorded, which shows that the higher authority, who has passed the sanction under sub-section (2) of section 151 had passed the sanction without looking into the reasons given in the notice under section 148 recorded by the Inco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the said order because he was not aware of any order passed by the Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, under sub-section (2) of section 151 of the Income-tax Act. He only came to know when he received the copy of the reasons dated May 31, 2001, which was received by the petitioner on May 13, 2003. In view of the above fact that the petitioner himself did not diligently conduct his case before the appropriate authority and there is gross delay and laches on the part of the petitioner and the petitioner has alternate remedy to raise his grievance before the concerned authority. This is not a fit case nor should this court entertain the writ petition against a show cause notice issued on May 31, 2001 in the year 2003. Learned couns ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
