Delhi High Court
Ernst And Young U.S. Llp vs Assistant Commissioner Of ... on 20 May, 2022
$~15
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 7791/2022 & CM APPLs.23857-23858/2022
ERNST AND YOUNG U.S. LLP ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr. Advocate with
Ms. Soumya Singh and Ms. Ananya
Kapoor, Advocates.
versus
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE
INTERNATIONAL, TAXATION 1-2-2 & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Puneet Rai with Ms. Adeeba
Mujahid and Mr. Karan Pandey,
Advocates.
% Date of Decision: 20th May, 2022
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
JUDGMENT
MANMOHAN, J (Oral):
1. Present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 13th
April, 2022 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( for
short 'Act') and the notice dated 13th April, 2022 passed under Section 148
of the Act.
2. Learned senior counsel for the Petitioner states that the Petitioner had
been given time till 8th April, 2022 to reply to the Show Cause notice dated
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signing Date:23.05.2022
19:02:30
30th March, 2022 as well as corrigendum dated 1st April, 2022. He further
states that the impugned order under Section 148A(d) has been passed
without considering the Petitioner's request for adjournment dated 09th
April, 2022 as well as 12th April, 2022 and detailed reply dated 13th April,
2022 (uploaded on 14th April, 2022) to the Show Cause notice. He
emphasises that the impugned order proceeds on the basis that the Petitioner
did not file any reply to the Show Cause Notice.
3. Issue notice. Mr. Puneet Rai, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf
of Respondents-Revenue.
4. He states that in the present case, the adjournment request had not
been filed within the stipulated time i.e. till 8th April, 2022. Therefore,
according to him, the Assessing Officer was well within its right to pass the
order under Section 148A(d) of the Act.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view
that the Petitioner-Assessee has a right to get adequate time in accordance
with the Act to submit its reply. Section 148A(b) permits the Assessing
Officer to suo moto provide up to thirty days period to an assessee to
respond to the Show Cause Notice issued under Section 148A(b), which
period may in fact be further extended upon an application made by the
Assessee in this behalf, and such period given to the assessee is excluded in
computing the period of limitation for issuance of notice under Section 148
of the Act in terms of the third proviso to Section 149 of the Act.
6. Since, in the present case, the Petitioner-Assessee is a resident of the
United States of America, this Court is of the view that the delay of one day
in asking for an adjournment should not have led to closure of the right to
file a reply to the Show Cause Notice.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signing Date:23.05.2022
19:02:30
7. Consequently, the impugned order passed under Section 148A(d) as
well as the notice under Section 148 of the Act, both dated 13th April, 2022,
are quashed and the Respondent No.1 is directed to pass a fresh reasoned
order under Section 148A(d) after considering the reply dated 13th / 14th
April, 2022 filed by the Petitioner in accordance with law within eight
weeks. With the aforesaid direction, the present writ petition and
applications are disposed of.
MANMOHAN, J
MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J
MAY 20, 2022
AS
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signing Date:23.05.2022
19:02:30
