Chattisgarh High Court

Sandeep Kumar Aayam vs Union Of India on 13 May, 2022

NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WPT No. 5 of 2022
 Ramesh Kumar Agrawal S/o Ved Prakash Agrawal Aged About 51 Years
Post Box No. 21 M/s Mittal Stone Crusher, Mayapur, Ambikapur, Surguja
Chhattisgarh 497001.
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. Union Of India Through Principal Commissioner Income Tax Department,
Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines Raipur Chhattisgarh 492001.
2. Income Tax Officer Ward 1 Ambikapur Income Tax Department, Agrasen
Marg, Ambikapur District Surguja Chhattisgarh 497001.
---- Respondents

WPT No. 4 of 2022
 Pinky Agrawal W/o Rajendra Agrawal D/o Maugi Agrawal, Aged About 48
Years R/o. House No. 186 K Near Holly Cross School Ward No. 8
Patpariya M.G. Road, Ambikapur District Surguja Chhattisgarh 497001
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. Union Of India Through Principal Commissioner Income Tax Department,
Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines Raipur Chhattisgarh 492001
2. Income Tax Officer Ward 1 Ambikapur Income Tax Department, Agrasen
Marg, Ambikapur District Surguja Chhattisgarh 497001.
---- Respondents
WPT No. 103 of 2022
 Sanjeev Sinha S/o Late Laxmi Prasad Sinha Aged About 54 Years R/o
Ward No. 27, Shastri Ward, Mayapur, Ambikapur, District Sarguja 497001
Chhattisgarh.
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. Union Of India Through Principal Commissioner Income Tax Department,
Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines Raipur Chhattisgarh 492001,
2. Income Tax Officer Ward 1 Ambikapur Income Tax Department, Agrasen
Marg Ambikapur District Surguja Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondents

WPT No. 101 of 2022
 Pravin Singh Aayam S/o Balinder Prasad Aayam, Aged About 30 Years R/o
Gautiyapara Road, Wadrafnagar, District Surguja Chhattisgarh,
2

---- Petitioner
Versus
1. Union Of India Through Principal Commissioner Income Tax Department,
Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines Raipur Chhattisgarh 492001,
2. Income Tax Officer Ward 1 Ambikapur Income Tax Department, Agrasen
Marg Ambikapur District Surguja Chhattisgarh. 497001
---Respondents
WPT No. 116 of 2022
 Sandeep Kumar Aayam S/o Balinder Prasad Aayam Aged About 25 Years
R/o Wadrafnagar, P.S.- Basantpur, District- Balrampur, Chhattisgarh,
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. Union Of India Through Principal Commissioner, Income Tax Department,
Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District :
Raipur, Chhattisgarh
2. Income Tax Officer Ward 1 Ambikapur, Income Tax Department, Agrasen
Marg, Ambikapur, District- Surguja, Chhattisgarh 497001
---- Respondents
WPT No. 7 of 2022
 Premlata Minj W/o Mr. Franklin Toppo Aged About 46 Years D/o Abednego
Minj, Aged About 46 Years R/o House No. 162, Mangal Pandey Ward No.
13, Near New Pani Tanki Namnakala, Ambikapur District Surguja
Chhattisgarh 497001
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. Union Of India Through Principal Commissioner, Income Tax Department,
Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines Raipur Chhattisgarh 492001
2. Income Tax Officer, Ward No. 01, Ambikapur, Income Tax Department,
Agrasen Marg, Ambikapur District Surguja Chhattisgarh 497001
---- Respondents
WPT No. 6 of 2022
 Pranjal Mittal S/o Ramesh Kumar Mittal Aged About 24 Years R/o Chandni
Chowk Mayapur Ambikapur, District- Surguja, Chhattisgarh, 497001,
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. Union Of India Through Principal Commissioner, Income Tax Department,
Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines, Raipur, Chhattisgarh- 492001,
2. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 Ambikapur, Income Tax Department, Agrasen
Marg, Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh 497001
---- Respondents
3

________________________________________________________________________
For Petitioners : Shri Pravin Kumar Tulsyan, Advocate appears
along with Shri Karan Kumar Baharani,
Advocate
For Respondent No.1 : Shri Manoj Mishra, Shri Tushal Dhar Diwan,
Shri Sumit Singh, Shri Abhishek Gupta, Shri
Shikhar Sharma and Shri Ram Narayan Sahu,
Advocates
For Respondent No.2 : Shri Amit Chaudhari, Shri Ajay Kumrani and
Shri Topilal Bareth, Advocates
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal Order On Board 13.05.2022

1. By way of this petition, the Petitioners are questioning the legality and

propriety of the notice issued by Respondent No.2- Income Tax Officer under

Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

2. At the outset, the issue involved herein has already been decided by the

Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.277/2021 along with other

connected matters, wherein it is observed at paragraphs 4 and 5 as under :

" 4. As the Hon'ble Supreme Court had decided the matter, namely,

Union of India & Others v. Ashish Agarwal, reported in (2022) SCC

Online SC 543, and as certain time-lines are indicated therein, I.A. No. 2 of

2022 was filed.

5. The Hon'ble Supreme Court disposed of the aforesaid case as

follows:

"26. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, the present Appeals are ALLOWED IN PART. The impugned common judgment and orders passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in W.T. No. 524/2021 and other allied tax appeals/petitions, is/are hereby modified and substituted as under:-

(i) The impugned section 148 notices issued to the

respective assessees which were issued under unamended section 148 of the IT Act, which were the subject matter of writ petitions before the various respective High Courts shall be deemed to have been issued under section 148A of the IT Act as substituted by the Finance Act, 2021 and construed or treated to be show-cause notices in terms of section 148A(b). The assessing officer shall, within thirty days from today provide to the respective assessees information and material relied upon by the Revenue, so that the assessees can reply to the show-cause notices within two weeks thereafter;

(ii) The requirement of conducting any enquiry, if required, with the prior approval of specified authority under section 148A(a) is hereby dispensed with as a one-time measure vis-a-vis those notices which have been issued under section 148 of the unamended Act from 01.04.2021 till date, including those which have been quashed by the High Courts.

Even otherwise as observed hereinabove holding any enquiry with the prior approval of specified authority is not mandatory but it is for the concerned Assessing Officers to hold any enquiry, if required;

(iii) The assessing officers shall thereafter pass orders in terms of section 148A(d) in respect of each of the concerned assessees; Thereafter after following the procedure as required under Section 148A may issue notice under section 148 (as substituted);

(iv) All defences which may be available to the assesses including those available under section 149 of the IT Act and all rights and contentions which may be available to the concerned assesses and Revenue under the Finance Act, 2021 and in law shall continue to be available.

27. The present order shall be applicable PAN INDIA and all judgments and orders passed by different High Courts on the issue and under which similar notices which were issued after 01.04.2021 issued under section 148 of the Act are set aside and shall be governed by the present order and shall stand modified to the aforesaid extent. The present order is passed in exercise of powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India so as to avoid any further appeals by the Revenue on the very issue by challenging similar judgments and orders, with a view not to burden this Court with approximately 9000 appeals. We also observe that present order shall also govern the pending writ petitions, pending before various High Courts in which similar notices under Section 148 of the Act issued after 01.04.2021 are under challenge.

28. The impugned common judgments and orders passed by the High Court of Allahabad and the similar judgments and orders passed by various High Courts, more particularly, the respective judgments and orders passed by the various High Courts particulars of which are mentioned hereinabove, shall stand modified/substituted to the aforesaid extent only.

29. All these appeals are accordingly partly allowed to the aforesaid extent.

30. In the facts of the case, there shall be no order as to costs."

3. In the light of the observation made by the Division Bench of this Court, the

petitions stand disposed of. Sd/-

(Sanjay S. Agrawal) JUDGE sunita