9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 1127X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e respondents would submit that the writ petitions are not maintainable because petitioner has efficacious remedies available under the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) i.e. appeal under Section 246 of the Act before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) thereafter appeal before the Appellate Tribunal then against the order of the Tribunal appeal before the High Court in terms of Section 260A of the Act. 4. In opposition learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is true that the aforesaid remedies are available but availability of such remedies will not deprive the petitioner from invoking extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India when principles of natural justice and the procedures for reassessment have not been followed. 5. In the context of said submission learned counsel for the petitioner highlighted that when Notice under Section 148 of the Act has to be issued, reasons have to be furnished so as to enable the assessee to file objections which objections are required to be considered and disposed of by the Assessing Officer (A.O.) by passing a speaking order until then, A.O. cannot pass the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 148 has been uploaded on 13.02.19 successfully. Due to system utility file incompatibility, there was delay. In fact, it is on record that the AO has re-opened the assessment of four years viz., AY 2012-13, AY 2013-14, AY 2015-16 and AY 2016-17 on the same day i.e., 10.01.2019. In view of the above, the show cause notice may kindly be dropped." 8. A.O. thereafter on 15.02.2019 issued two separate Notices under Section 143(2) of the Act mentioning therein that there are certain points in connection with the returns of income submitted by the petitioner on 13.02.2019 for the assessment years 2012-13 and 2013-14 regarding which some further information is required therefore asked the petitioner to attend the office on 18.02.2019. 9. Regarding other two assessment years AY 2015-16 and AY 2016-17 the returns were processed. 10. On the same date i.e. 15.02.2019, four separate Notices under sub-section (1) of Section 142 of the Act have been issued by the A.O. requiring the petitioner to furnish by or before 18.02.2019, the accounts and documents mentioned therein to which the petitioner responded on 18.02.2019, with a request to allow time up to 04.03.2019 so as to enable the petitio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 30.09.2015 and for the year 2016-17 on 17.10.2016 declaring therein the income. The returns were duly processed under Section 143(1) of the Act and acknowledged. 15. In the year 2019, Notices under Section 148 of the Act have been issued proposing reassessment of income for the assessment years 2012-13, 2013-14, 2015-16 and 2016-17. It is quite clear that the petitioner-Corporation has received the said notices which are digitally signed by the petitioner on 10.01.2019. However, hard copies have been received on 16.01.2019. Petitioner-Corporation was required to respond within thirty days from the date of service of notice which is 10.01.2019. Petitioner-Corporation responded to the notice admittedly on 13.02.2019 and communicated to A.O. that original returns already filed are valid. The said returns were e-filed again on the same date i.e. 13.02.2019 and also requested to provide reasons for re-opening of assessments under Section 147 of the Act. 16. Respondent No.2 noticing that the petitioner has not responded to the Notices under Section 148 within thirty days has issued other show cause notices on 12.02.2019 asking the petitioner as to why prosecution proceedings under Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d orders have been passed which in turn would suggest that the respondent has not only breached the principles of natural justice but also breached the procedure which was required to be followed for decision (reassessment). 19. In the aforesaid view, we are fortified by the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer: [2002] 125 Taxman 963 (SC) wherein it has been held as under:- "We see no justifiable reason to interfere with the order under challenge. However, we clarify that when a notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act is issued, the proper course of action for the noticee is to file return and if he so desires, to seek reasons for issuing notices. The Assessing Officer is bound to furnish reasons within a reasonable time. On receipt of reasons, the noticee is entitled to file objections to issuance of notice and the Assessing Officer is bound to dispose of the same by passing a speaking order. In the instant case, as the reasons have been disclosed in these proceedings, the Assessing Officer has to dispose of the objections, if filed, by passing a speaking order, before proceeding with the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1321: (1965) 2 SCR 653, Siliguri Municipality v. Amalendu Das12: (1984) 2 SCC 436: (1984) SCC (Tax) 133, S.T. Muthusami v. K. Natarajan13: (1988) 1 SCC 572, Rajasthan SRTC v. Krishna Kant14: (1995) 5 SCC 75: 1995 SCC (L&S) 1207: (1995) 31 ATC 110, Kerala SEB v. Kurien E. Kalathil15: (2000) 6 SCC 293, A. Venkatasubbiah Naidu v. S. Chellappan16: (2000) 7 SCC 695, L.L. Sudhakar Reddy v. State of A.P.17: (2001) 6 SCC 634, Shri Sant Sadguru Janardan Swami (Moingiri Maharaj) Sahakari Dugdha Utpadak Sanstha v. State of Maharashtra18: (2001) 8 SCC 509, Pratap Singh v. State of Haryana19: (2002) 7 SCC 484: 2002 SCC (L&S) 1075 and GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. ITO20: (2003) 1 SCC 72]. (Emphasis added) 21. For the stated reasons and the law, we are satisfied that there has been a breach of principles of natural justice and also the procedure, required to be adopted for passing assessment orders on reassessment and demand orders, have not been followed. Therefore, an exceptional case for invoking power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Both the orders being unsustainable, to ask the petitioner to avail remedies of appeal, matter will unnecessarily get protracted. 22. It is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
