High Court of Delhi was dealing with the petition filed challenging the order dated 28th March, 2022 passed by Respondent under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2018-19, Show Cause Notice dated 7th March, 2022 issued under Section 148A(b) of the Act as well as notice dated 28th March, 2022 purportedly issued under Section
148 of the Act.
Petitioner’s Contention:
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order dated 28th March, 2022 is a non-speaking order which does not deal with the contentions raised by the Petitioner in reply to the impugned Show Cause Notice dated 7thMarch, 2022. It was submitted that the impugned order dated 28th March, 2022 has been issued in a mechanical manner and without any independent application of mind by placing reliance on the information provided by the investigation wing which does not have any rational nexus with the petitioner.
HC’s Observations:
After hearing both the sides Court stated that in the impugned order dated 28 th March, 2022, the respondent has opined that the petitioner-assessee has not been able to rebut the statement made on oath by the entry provider. HC opined that the impugned order is a speaking and reasoned order. HC stated that pertinently, the assessee has only submitted bank statements and not the books of accounts before the Assessing Officer.
HC relied upon the case of Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. vs. Income-tax Officer, Centre Circle XI, Range Bombay and Ors. where it has been held that, “In determining whether commencement of reassessment proceedings was valid it has only to be seen whether there was prima facie some material on the basis of which the department could reopen the case. The sufficiency or correctness of the material is not a thing to be considered at this stage”.
HC opined that though it is the petitioner’s case that the impugned order is erroneous on facts, yet the petitioner would have ample opportunity during the course of proceedings before different statutory forums to show that the finding of fact arrived at was erroneous. Moreover, at this stage, no assessment order has been passed and it has only been observed that it is a fit case for issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act.
HC Held:
After evaluating submissions made by both the parties the Court held that “as the Income Tax Act, 1961 provides complete machinery for assessment/reassessment of tax, assessee is not permitted to abandon that machinery and invoke jurisdiction of High Court under Article 226. Consequently, the present case does not fall under the exceptional grounds on which a writ petition is maintainable at the interim stage in tax matters”.
Case Title: Gulmuhar Silk Pvt Ltd v. Income Tax Officer Ward 10(3) Delhi
Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manmohan and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma
Citation: W.P.(C) 5787/2022 & CM APPL.17297/2022
Decided on: 7th April 2022
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :