Madhya Pradesh High Court
Agrawal Distilleries Pvt. Ltd. Through ... vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax on 27 February, 2025
Author: Vivek Rusia
Bench: Vivek Rusia
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:5245
1 WP-3252-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GAJENDRA SINGH
ON THE 27 th OF FEBRUARY, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 3252 of 2025
AGRAWAL DISTILLERIES PVT. LTD. THROUGH AUTHORISED
SIGNATORY JAIVINDER SINGH BHATIA
Versus
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Priyvrat Singh Chouhan - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Harsh Parashar - Advocate for the respondents.
ORDER
Per: Justice Vivek Rusia
The petitioner has filed this present petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India challenging the validity of notices dated 29.12.2023 issued
by the respondent No.1-Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Indore under
Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Years 2018-19 to
2020-21. After service of the aforesaid notices, petitioner raised an objection
against the limitation of the proceedings under Section 153C of the Income Tax
Act which came to be rejected by the Assessing Officer vide order dated
04.12.2024. Hence, the petitioner has filed this present petition.
2. Facts of the case, in a nutshell, are that a search and seizure operation
under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act was conducted in the premises of Mr.
Lalit Kumar Challani, Mr. Praveen Kakkar and R.K.Miglani Group on
07.04.2019. In the said search, various documents and digital data related to the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:5245
2 WP-3252-2025
present petitioner came to the notice of search party. Accordingly a satisfaction
note as required under the provision Section 153C of the Income Tax Act was
prepared by the Assessing Officer along with forwarding letter dated 22.08.2023
by the DCIT, Central Circle Mumbai and communicated to the Assessing Officer
of the petitioner. The petitioner vide letter dated 23.10.2024 filed an objection
that the limitation for initiation of proceeding under Section 153C of the Income
Tax Act has lapsed in view of the decision taken by the Apex Court in case of
Commissioner of Income Tax - III vs. M/s Calcutta Knitwear, Luldhiana reported
in (2014) 6 SCC 444.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after the judgment
passed by the Apex Court in case Calcutta Knitwear (supra) , CBDT has issued a
circular dated 31.12.2015 directing all concerned not to press or withdraw the
recording of satisfaction note under Section 158BD/153C of the Income Tax Act
if it does not meet the guidelines laid down by the Apex Court. Learned counsel
for the petitioner submits that in this case also there is a delay in communicating
the information to the Assessing Officer of the petitioner. Hence, in the light of
judgment passed by the Apex Court in case of Calcutta Knitwear (supra) and the
CBDT circular dated 31.12.2015, the proceedings are liable to be dropped.
4. Shri Harsh Parashar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents
submits that the issue raised by the petitioner in the present case has already been
answered by this Court in Writ Petition No. 37114 of 2024 (Shri Anand Kumar
Kedia vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors. & connected cases) and
dismissed vide order dated 17.12.2024, therefore, this petition is also liable to be
dismissed. Learned counsel for the respondent further submits that one of the writ
has petitioner approached the Apex Court by way of SLP in which notice has been
issued but liberty has been granted to the petitioner to raise the issue of limitation
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:5245
3 WP-3252-2025
before the Assessing Officer and if the Assessing Officer comes to the conclusion
that the proceedings are time barred, then there would be no question to go for
further proceeding under Section 142 or 143 of the Income Tax Act.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
5. In the present case, the petitioner has already raised an objection
against initiation of proceedings under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act
before the Assessing Officer which has been negated vide order dated
04.12.2024. Now, the notice under Section 142(1) and 143(2) of the Income Tax
Act have been issued to the petitioner. So far as the Assessment Years 2018-19 to
2020-21 are concerned, there is no delay for issuance of notice under Section
153C, 142(1) and 143(2). The petitioner has started participating in the
proceeding under Section 142 / 143 of the Income Tax Act before the Assessing
Officer. Petitioner has already filed reply to these notices before the Assessing
Officer. Now the validity of the proceeding under Section 153C of the Income
Tax Act cannot be challenged. The Apex Court has entertained the SLPs in those
cases where enquiry has been initiated in respect of Assessment Year prior to six
years. As regards the issue of delay in preparation of satisfactory note and
communication to the Assessing Officer of a third person is concerned, the same
has been decided by this Division Bench in Writ Petition No. 37114 of 2024 .
Hence, no case for interference is made out.
6. In view of the above, the writ petition stands dismissed.
(VIVEK RUSIA) (GAJENDRA SINGH)
JUDGE JUDGE
vidya
