Delhi High Court
Ccteb India Private Limited vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax ... on 26 April, 2022
$~6
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 6417/2022
CCTEB INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Sumit Bansal, Mr. Udaibir Singh
Kochar, Ms. Tanya Aggarwal and
Mr.Aditya Bakshi, Advs
versus
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-17,
DELHI AND ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing
counsel with Mr.Vipul Agrawal and
Mr.Parth Semwal, Advs.
% Date of Decision: 26th April, 2022
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SHARMA
JUDGMENT
MANMOHAN, J (Oral):
CM APPL.19432/2022 (exemption)
Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.
Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) 6417/2022 & CM APPL. 19431/2022(stay)
1. Present writ petition has been filed challenging the Assessment Order
dated 31st March, 2022, passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 153A
of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for
Assessment Year 2019-20.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:KRISHNA BHOJ
Signing Date:27.04.2022
19:51:09
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the respondent No.1
while passing the said impugned order, made additions totalling to Rs.14.75
crores primarily on the ground that the petitioner had failed to file reply to
the show cause notice issued by the respondent No.1 on 21st March, 2022
around midnight. He states that the said show cause notice was served upon
the petitioner via e-mail asking the petitioner to respond to the said notice by
3:45 pm on the very next day, i.e. 23rd March, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that by way of the said show
cause notice running into 92 pages, the petitioner was directed to provide
various documents for the first time during the assessment proceedings. He
states that the said documents were never asked for by the respondent No.1
at any earlier point of time during the assessment proceedings. He
emphasises that the respondent No.1 had prior in time issued four notices
under Section 142(1) which were duly complied with by the petitioner and
in none of the said notices, the details as mentioned in the show cause notice
dated 21st March 2022, were called for by the respondent No.1. He states
that vide the said show cause notice dated 21st March, 2022, the petitioner
was made aware for the first time of the result of the post search/inquiries
qua the petitioner and that deposition had been made by some persons
against the petitioner.
4. Per contra, Mr. Zoheb Hossain, learned counsel for the
respondent/Revenue states that the principle of natural justice has been duly
complied with in the present case, inasmuch as, adequate opportunities were
given to the petitioners to respond to the four notices issued by the
Department. He contends that the last notice was issued at the fag end of
March as the petitioner had not furnished adequate response to the four
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:KRISHNA BHOJ
Signing Date:27.04.2022
19:51:09
show cause notices dated 10th December, 2021, 22nd December, 2021, 7th
February, 2022 and 17th February, 2022 under Sections 142(1) of the Income
Tax Act, 1961.
5. Mr. Zoheb Hossain, learned counsel for Revenue also states that
despite receipt of the notice dated 21st March 2022, the petitioner neither
filed any reply nor sought any additional time.
6. In rejoinder, learned counsel for the petitioner states that after receipt
of the notice dated 21st March, 2022, the Director as well as the authorised
representative of the petitioner Company had visited the office of the
respondent No.1 on 23rd March, 2022 and sought additional time to file
response to the said show cause notice. He, however, states that the
authorised representative of the petitioner's Company was not entertained by
the respondent No.1.
7. Mr. Zoheb Hossain, learned counsel for Revenue disputes the
aforesaid fact.
8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view
that time of one and a half day given by the respondent-Revenue to the
petitioner to respond to the notice dated 21st March, 2022 in the peculiar
facts of the present case was not sufficient. It is pertinent to mention that
the show cause notice dated 21st March 2022 runs into 92 pages and is
accompanied by the deposition of certain individuals which were not
provided to the petitioner prior thereto.
9. Consequently, in the peculiar facts of the present case, the impugned
assessment order dated 31st March 2022 is set aside. Petitioner is directed to
file its response to the show cause notice dated 21st March 2022 within three
weeks. Respondent is directed to pass an assessment order within four
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:KRISHNA BHOJ
Signing Date:27.04.2022
19:51:09
weeks thereafter by way of a reasoned order in accordance with law.
10. With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition along with
pending application stands disposed of. This Court clarifies that it has not
commented on the merits of the controversy. The rights and contentions of
all the parties are left open.
MANMOHAN, J
DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J
APRIL 26, 2022
st
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:KRISHNA BHOJ
Signing Date:27.04.2022
19:51:09
