Madras High Court
Unknown vs The Principal Director Of Income ... on 20 May, 2021
WP.No.35319 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 20.05.2021
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH
W.P. No.35319 of 2019
and WMP.Nos.36129 & 36130 of 2019
6th Sense Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.,
Rep. by its Director N.Nandakumar
No. 6 Dr.TV Naidu Road Chetpet
Chennai 600031. .. Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Principal Director of Income Tax (Circle 2)
New No. 46 Old No. 108 Nungambakkam High Road
Chennai 600034.
2. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
Central Circle - 2(3) Room No.126,
Investigation Building 46 Mahatma Gandhi Road
Nungambakkam Chennai – 600034.
3. The Deputy Director of Income Tax (INV)
Unit 4(1) Investigation Wing
(Room No. 115 1st Floor) New No. 46,
Old No. 108 Nungambakkam High Road
Chennai 600034. .. Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying
to Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the 2nd Respondent culminating in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1
WP.No.35319 of 2019
the impugned notice PAN. AABCT9830H/ 2019-20 dated 29.10.2019 read with
the notice bearing No. ITBA/ AST/ S/ 153C/ 2019-20/1018477224(1) dated
30.09.2019 issued by the 2nd Respondent under section 153 C of the Act for AY
2017-19 and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mrs.L.Maithili
For Respondents : Mr.A.P.Srinivas
Senior Standing Counsel
ORDER
The petitioner in this Writ Petition is a limited company incorporated under
the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 with the object of running a business in
the field of Software Development, Knowledge Process Outsourcing (KPO),
Technical Education and Development of Real Estate and other objects in
conjunction with IT/ITES businesses. It had applied to the State Industries
Promotion Corporation of Tamil Nadu (SIPCOT) for allotment of a plot of land in
an Information Technology Park set up by SIPCOT at Siruseri for setting up of a
software development and KPO unit. It was allotted a property admeasuring 11.12
acres under a 99 year deed of lease dated 11.05.2005.
2. The setting up of the unit was delayed and extension of time was sought
for by the petitioner from time to time in regard to the deployment of the property
for its business. However, according to the petitioner, despite its best efforts, the
petitioner was unable to commercially exploit the premises even after a decade
from its allotment.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.35319 of 2019
3. In 2016, a group of shareholders of the petitioner company belonging to
the family of Dinesh Chand Surana (‘individual’), who wished to exit the business
had offered their shares to the remaining shareholders. Since the shareholders were
not willing to increase their share-holding, the said individual undertook to find
buyers for the company, such that all existing shareholders could exit.
4. On 01.10.2016, a Board resolution was passed recording the position that
the existing shareholders resolved to exit the company and the aforesaid individual
was authorised to identify a purchaser and engage in all actions for this purpose.
According to the petitioner, the individual was not authorised to receive any
consideration towards the aforesaid arrangement, either in part or in full and his
mandate extended only to the extent of him identifying a purchaser. Thereafter
matters were to be left with the Board and SIPCOT to take forward in a proper
manner.
5. In pursuance of the above arrangement, the individual is said to have
been entrusted with the temporary custody of all original documents including the
lease deed with SIPCOT, share certificates and other documents that a prospective
purchaser may seek for the purpose of conducting due diligence. A draft
Memorandum of Undertaking (MOU) dated 22.11.2016 is also said to have been
prepared by the individual duly executed by all Directors which was blank in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.35319 of 2019
regard to the details of the anticipated purchaser who was being identified by the
individual.
6. While this is so, the Director of the petitioner company who has deposed
to the affidavit filed in support of this Writ Petition received summons under
Section 131 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’) calling upon him to
appear before the Additional Deputy Director of Income Tax and it was only when
the deponent appeared that, according to him, he came to know of a search carried
out in the premises of a third party, ostensibly unconnected with this petitioner,
from whom the documents entrusted to the individual had been seized.
7. These documents constitute (i) original lease deed between SIPCOT and
the petitioner company dated 11.05.2005 (ii) allotment letter dated 16.02.2004
issued by SIPCOT in favour of the company (iii) letter of handing over of
possession dated 02.08.2005 executed by SIPCOT in favour of the petitioner
company (iv) original share certificates issued by the petitioner in favour of its
shareholders and (v) undated incomplete MOU duly executed by all Directors of
the petitioner company.
8. In the course of proceedings before the Income Tax Department, the
petitioner explained that it had nothing whatsoever to do with the third party who
had been searched. The entire narration of how the documents had come to be
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.35319 of 2019
entrusted to the individual and were found in his possession, had also been
explained. Certain documents and details were called for from the petitioner that,
the petitioner states were handed over. The enquiry did not proceed thereafter.
9. A warrant of provisional attachment came to be issued under Section
132(9B) attaching the land and building at S.No.76 Egatoor Village, Kanchipuram
District of an extent of 11.12 acres (property/property in question). Despite the
petitioner having objected to the same, there was neither any response nor action
taken by the respondents to lift the attachment, and hence W.P.No.14023 of 2019
came to be filed before this Court seeking a quash of the provisional attachment
order.
10. In that Writ Petition, a counter had been filed dated 19.06.2019 wherein
the Additional Deputy Director of Income Tax (Inv.) (R3 in that Writ Petition) had
stated that the seized documents could not be returned since the file was to be
handed over to the appropriate Assessing Authority for assessment proceedings to
be initiated as against the petitioner. The counter went on to state that the Writ
Petition was itself infructuous, since the provisional attachment had ceased to have
effect after the expiry of six months from the date of attachment as per Statute.
11. The counter confirmed the position that as on that date, proceedings had
yet to be initiated and that a notice under Section 153A or 153C as appropriate,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.35319 of 2019
was in the offing. Pending Writ Petition, a notice under Section 153C was received
by the petitioner calling for returns for Assessment Year (AY) 2017. The notice
was dated 14.06.2019 and called for a return on or before 08.07.2019. The
petitioner, while pointing out that the time granted was short, in any event, called
attention to its earlier return filed on 27.10.2017 declaring a loss, and which had
been accepted by the Central Processing Centre (CPC) at Bangalore on
01.03.2018. It requested that the return filed earlier be treated as the return of
income to be filed in compliance of the notice under Section 153C.
12. The petitioner also requested that the satisfaction note be furnished to
the petitioner along with approval/sanction for issuance of the Section 153C
notice, notification for transfer of the petitioner’s case to the Central Circle,
statements recorded, copies of the documents claimed to have been seized from the
party, appraisal report and other relevant documents.
13. Since there was no response to the aforesaid request, the petitioner
impleaded the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle (R2 in this
Writ petition) as a respondent, R5, in W.P.No.14023 of 2019. R5 filed an
additional counter dated 23.08.2019 stating that the time limit for completion of
assessment in the V.K.Sasikala group of cases (the entity subject to search under
Section 132 of the Act) was till 31.12.2019 and the proper course of action would
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.35319 of 2019
be for the Assessing Officer (AO) to evaluate the available materials and complete
the proceedings for assessment.
14. That Writ Petition was disposed on 13.09.2019 holding that the
attachment had lapsed by elapse of time. The Court also held that the petitioner
was not entitled for the return of seized documents and that the AO would proceed
with the assessment in accordance with law.
15. On 30.09.2019 Section 153C notices were received for AYs 2012-13,
2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2015-16, 2016-17 and 2017-18, in response to which,
the petitioner, by letter dated 09.10.2019, stated that the returns filed earlier for the
aforesaid years were being re-submitted for compliance with the present notices.
On 29.10.2019, a show cause notice came to be issued by R2 pointing out to the
recovery of certain allegedly incriminating evidence from Krishnapriya, niece of
V.K.Sasikala, indicating a cash payment made to the individual totalling Rs.86
crores, in the name of the petitioner company. The petitioner was called upon to
show cause as to why the aforesaid amount not be treated as income from other
sources in its hands. Various documents were called for.
16. The petitioner reiterated its earlier request for materials said to have
been found in the search and such materials as well as some of the statements
recorded in the course of search were furnished to it. R2, on 02.12.2019 issued an
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.35319 of 2019
order of provisional attachment under Section 281B. It is at that juncture that the
present Writ Petition has come to be filed, on 18.12.2019, wherein the petitioner
prays for a Writ of Certiorari quashing notices issued under Section 153C dated
30.09.2019 and show cause notice dated 29.10.2019.
17. According to the petitioner, the proceedings initiated under the
impugned notices are without jurisdiction, since there is no income escaping
assessment, which a pre-condition for the initiation of the proceedings themselves.
The petitioner would urge that the seized documents do not incriminate it in any
way and hence the respondents ought not to have commenced the present
proceedings based on those documents.
18. Though reference is made to the factual aspects of the matter, i.e., the
details of the materials seized, and the circumstances in which the documents came
to be in the possession of the individual and thereafter in the possession of the
person searched, I consciously desist from referring to either the details of the
documents or the narration in regard to the transaction itself and restrict myself to
the legal issues raised.
19. The petitioner would stress on the position that the individual had been
prohibited from receiving any amount towards the sale of the company and the
company thus disavows all relationship with such amounts. If at all such amount
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.35319 of 2019
had been received by the individual, the same is not liable to be assessed in the
petitioner’s hands.
20. The individual, apart from being a shareholder of the company, carries
on multiple businesses and the amounts said to be seized could well relate to any
of his business transactions. To state that the petitioner should be subjected to
assessment simply on this basis is thus wholly incorrect and improper, according
to the petitioner.
21. In counter the respondents have set out their version of the transaction
between the petitioner and the individual highlighting the aspect of escapement of
income. According to the respondents, the search initiated in the case of Surana
group of companies and connected assesses revealed documents relating to the
petitioner leading to a prima facie conclusion that cash had been received by the
individual on behalf of the company for sale of the company.
22. The counter refers to the sworn statements recorded from both factions,
ie., the faction that has filed the present Writ Petition as well as other Directors of
the company, in support of the prima facie contention that there is escapement of
income which has to be examined further by the AO in the course of assessment
proceedings. I refrain from committing to any of the factual details mentioned
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.35319 of 2019
therein as they pertain to on-going proceedings, and in the light of the conclusion I
have arrived at in the paragraphs to follow.
23. Having heard learned counsels, I am not in agreement with the
petitioner on this issue. The question of escapement of income from assessment or
otherwise is a matter of deduction and determination by the assessing officer based
on all relevant materials and explanations of the parties concerned. The
explanation and justification offered now by the petitioner in regard to the
documents found in the premises searched, is one that would have to be
considered by the officer to determine whether is any undisclosed income to be
brought to tax and the proper person/entity in whose hands it must be brought to
tax.
24. This is not an issue that can be looked into in a writ petition as it
involves determination of disputed facts. The challenge to assumption of
jurisdiction by the assessing officer would have to be seen in the context of
whether there has been escapement of income. The two issues are thus closely
interlinked and one cannot decide the question of jurisdiction without rendering a
finding on the aspect of escapement of income. I thus decline to interfere in the
challenge to assumption of jurisdiction, on this score.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.35319 of 2019
25. The petitioner would also state that no satisfaction note, as contemplated
under Section 153C has been furnished, despite a specific request. This is a pre-
condition for the initiation of proceedings under Section 153 C in the absence of
which the entire proceedings stand vitiated. The counter filed by the respondents
in the earlier writ petition had initially stated that a notice under Section 153A/C
was in the offing. Thereafter, and pending Writ Petition, a notice dated
14.06.2019 was received by the petitioner.
26. Mr.Srinivas was directed to produce the satisfaction note and had, at the
time of admission on 20.12.2019 produced an undated document stating that the
same was the satisfaction note of the IO. Counter dated 03.03.2020 also makes
reference to the satisfaction note handed over to the petitioner on 20.12.2019 (last
line of paragraph 6 of the counter).
27. A rejoinder has been filed wherein the petitioner objects to the
satisfaction note stated to have been given to it on the ground that it does not
reveal any material or reasoning to justify the initiation of proceedings against the
petitioner. The petitioner points out that the satisfaction note that was handed over
to the petitioner when the matter had come up for admission on 20.12.2019 was
undated, does not refer to any file number and was, to top it all, unsigned. These
allegations are factually correct.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.35319 of 2019
28. However, Mr.Srinivas has thereafter filed a compilation of documents
wherein the recording of satisfaction in the case of M.Sasikala on 27.08.2019 is
placed at document 1, satisfaction note relating to the petitioner dated 30.09.2019
is placed at page 7 and a satisfaction note in the case of Surana Corporation
Limited, also dated 30.09.2019, is placed at page 12. These documents filed in
typed set dated 24.09.2020 are complete and have been certified to be true copies
of the originals.
29. Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, all that the Court is
required to look into is whether satisfaction has been recorded and the
justification/sufficiency for such satisfaction is hardly a matter that the Court
would concern itself with. The satisfaction notes recorded in both cases are
extracted below:
‘Proforma for recording satisfaction under section 153C
(To be filled by the Assessing Officer of the person referred to section 153A)
1. Name of the Group searched Smt. N.Sasikala
2. Name and PAN of the person referred Smt. Sasikala
to in section 153A (PAN:AMNPS6598J)
3 Date of initiation of search in the case 09.11.2017
of the person referred to in section
153A
4 Name, address and PAN No. of the M/s.6th Sense Infrastructure
person whose case action under Private Limited
section 153C is proposed (PAN: AABCT9830H)
5 Specific details of the seized material Search proceedings were
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.35319 of 2019
on the basis of which action under conducted in the case of
section 153C is proposed: Smt.Sasikala on 09.11.2017.
(a) Nature of the seized material During the search and
(money/bullion/jewellery/other seizure proceedings in the
valuable article or thing/ books of case of V.K.Sasikala Group
account/ documents) at Room No.302, Shylee
(b) Description of the seized material Niwas Service Apartment,
(c) Address of premise/ place from Nutech Washington, Old
where such material was seized. No.41, New No.76, Block –
(d) Date of seizure of such material II, 1st Main Road, CIT
(e) Particulars of the relevant Nagar, Nandanam, Chennai
panchnama on 18.11.2017 various
(f) Annexure/S.No./Page number etc. incriminating materials in
(particulars to be specified) the form of lease
agreements, incorporation
certificates, original Share
certificates and
Memorandum of
Understandings (MOUs)
were seized vide annexure
ANN/KGA/VKS/LS/S-2 to
the Panchnama dated
18.11.2017 and
incriminating materials in
the form of loose sheets
(page numbered 18 & 19)
seized from the premises of
Smt.Krishnapriya, daughter
of Smt.Ilavarasi, at 181/69,
Habibullah Road, T.Nagar,
Chennai on 11.11.2017 vide
annexure ANN/MS/KK/LS/S
to the Panchanama dated
11.11.2017 which contained
details of various assets
purchased by Sasikala
group and the consideration
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.35319 of 2019
paid towards them.
6 Relationship of the person referred in M/s.6th Sense Infrastructure
S.No.4 with the person referred to in private Limited had involved
S.No.2 in selling their assets
including shares to Smt.
V.K.Sasikala
7 Satisfaction of the Assessing Officer of I am satisfied for the
the person referred to in section 153A detailed reason as per the
that the seized material referred to in annexure that the
S.No.5 with the person referred to in incriminating
S.No.4 documents/loose sheets
Seized vide annexure
ANN/KGA/VKS/LS/S-2 &
ANN/MS/KK/LS/S which
contain Original Share
certificates, incorporation
certificates of M/s.6th Sense
infrastructure Pvt Ltd and
MoU for the sale of assets
and shares pertains to
M/s.6th Sense infrastructure
Pvt. Ltd.
8 Assessment Years involved A.Y.2017-18.
Note:
1. Copy of relevant Panchnama may be sent at the time of handing over of the
relevant seized material
2. For the purposes of this proforma, seized material includes material requisitioned
under-section 132A
Name and Designation of the A.O: (Sd/-) XXXX
Date : 27.08.2019 (G.Ajay Robin Singh)
Place: Chennai Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Central Circle 2(2), Chennai.
Annexure
..............
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.35319 of 2019
Further During the course of search proceedings at Room No.302, Shylee
Niwas Service apartment, Nutech Lushington, old no.41, new no.76, block II, 1st Main
Road, CIT Nagar, Nandanam, Chennai, various incriminating documents in the form
of Memorandum of understandings (MOUs) and share certificates evidencing the sale
of various assets of prominent business groups across Tamil Nadu as elaborated in
Para was found. On perusal of the incriminating materials seized it is found that the
following documents related to M/s.6th Sense infrastructure Pvt Ltd. was found and
seized vide ANN/KGV/LS/S2.
Page No. Details
1-10 Financials of M/s.6th Sense Infrastructure Pvt Ltd for AY 2016-17
11-21 Financials of M/s.6th Sense Infrastructure Pvt Ltd for AY 2015-16
22-33 Copy of Memorandum of M/s.6th Sense Infrastructure Pvt Ltd.
34-45 Copy of Article of Association of M/s.6th Sense Infrastructure Pvt Ltd
46-59 Lease Deed between SIPCOT and M/s.6th sense Infrastructure Pvt Ltd.
on
11 May 2005.
60-69 Order of allotment of plot in SIPCOT for M/s.6 th Sense Infrastructure Pvt
Ltd.
70-95 Original Lease Deed between SIPCOT and M/s.6th Sense Infrastructure
Pvt Ltd. 11 May 2005
96 Incorporation certificate of M/s.6th Sense Infrastructure Pvt Ltd
97-102 Memorandum of Understanding for sale of equity shares of M/s.6th Sense
Infrastructure Pvt Ltd. for Rs.16 Crs. Singed by Lalit Mehta Mr.A.Nanda
Kumar and Dinesh Chand Surana.
103-195 Original Share Certificates of M/s.6th Sense Infrastructure Pvt Ltd
*
In view of the seizure of these highly incriminating materials, Shri.Senthil was
summoned once again and confronted with the seized materials. During the course of
the enquiry he confirmed the seized MoUs were the ones which were executed by Smt.
Sasikala with the vendors. The relevant portion of sworn statement Shri.Senthil dated
11.11.2017 is reproduced below:-
.........
Satisfaction Note u/s.153C
.........
Consequently the Assessing Officer of Sasikala Group after recording
satisfaction in the capacity of Assessing Officer of the searched party handed over the
seized materials on 27.08.2019 to this office i.e. ACIT, Central Circle 2 (3), Chennai
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.35319 of 2019
which is having jurisdiction over the case of M/s.Surana Corporation Ltd and M/s.6th
Sense Infrastructure Pvt Ltd as well.
........
On a complete perusal and analysis of seized materials together with the
corroborative sworn statement recorded during the course of search I am satisfied
that the incriminating materials seized vide annexure ANN/KGA/VKS/LS/S-2 and
ANN/MS/KK/LS/S which pertains to M/s.6th Sense Infrastructe Pvt Ltd have a bearing
on the determination of total income of M/s.6th Sense Infrastructure Pvt Ltd for the
financial year 2016-17 relevant to assessment year 2017-18.
Accordingly notice to be issued as per the provisions of section 153C IT At for
AY 2012-13 to 2018-19.
Date: 30.09.2019 Sd/-. XXXXXXX
H.Mahendran, IRS
ACIT, Central Circle 2(3), Chennai.
*******
‘Proforma for recording satisfaction under section 153C
(To be filled by the Assessing Officer of the person referred to section 153A)
1. Name of the Group searched M/s.Surana Corporation Limited
2. Name and PAN of the person referred M/s.Surana Corporation Limited
to in section 153A
(PAN:AAACS31221)
3 Date of initiation of search in the case 09.11.2017
of the person referred to in section
153A
4 Name, address and PAN No. of the M/s.6th Sense Infrastructure Private
person whose case action under Limited
section 153C is proposed
(PAN: AABCT9830H)
5 Specific details of the seized material Incriminating documents found
on the basis of which action under during the search and seizure
section 153C is proposed: proceedings in the case of
V.K.Sasikala Group at Room No.302,
(a) Nature of the seized material
Shylee Niwas Service Apartment,
(money/bullion/jewellery/other
Nutech Washington, Old No.41, New
valuable article or thing/ books of
No.76, Block –II, 1st Main Road, CIT
account/ documents)
Nagar, Nandanam, Chennai on
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.35319 of 2019
(b) Description of the seized material 18.11.2017 seized vide annexure
ANN/KGA/VKS/LS/S-2 and the
(c) Address of premise/ place from
incriminating materials seized from
where such material was seized.
the premises of Smt.Krishnapriya,
(d) Date of seizure of such material daughter of Smt.Ilavarasi, at 181/69,
Habibullah Road, T.Nagar, Chennai
(e) Particulars of the relevant
on 11.11.2017 vide annexure
panchnama
ANN/MS/KK/LS/S.
(f) Annexure/S.No./Page number etc.
(particulars to be specified)
6 Relationship of the person referred in Group concern of M/s Surana
S.No.4 with the person referred to in Corporation Ltd.
S.No.2
7 Satisfaction of the Assessing Officer of I am satisfied that the incriminating
the person referred to in section 153A documents/loose sheets Seized vide
that the seized material referred to in annexure ANN/KGA/VKS/LS/S-2 &
S.No.5 with the person referred to in ANN/MS/KK/LS/S contain (1)
S.No.4 Original Share certificates, Mou and
(2) the details of money receipts
towards sale of the property to the
tune of Rs.86 crores but not entered
into its regular books of accounts for
the A.Y.2012-13 to 2018-19. Hence,
I am satisfied that the above
mentioned seized materials have a
bearing on the determination of the
total income of the assessee for the
A.Y.2012-13 to 2018-19.
8 Assessment Years involved A.Y.2012-13 to 2018-19
Name and Designation of the A.O: (Sd/-) XXXX
Date : 30.09.2019 (H.MAHENDRAN)
Place: Chennai Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
Central Circle 2(3), Chennai.
30. The petitioner has referred to the judgment of the Supreme Court in the
case of Manisha Maheswari V. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.35319 of 2019
another (289 ITR 341) wherein the Supreme Court had reiterated the necessity for
recording of satisfaction prior to transfer of files by the Investigating Officer to the
AO having jurisdiction over an assessee. In the present case, the recording of
satisfaction prior to issuance to notice dated 30.09.2019 is apparent from the
record and the argument of the petitioner to the contrary is rejected.
31. Further, in the light of the confirmation furnished now to the effect that
the satisfaction had been issued by the IO only on 30.09.2019, notice dated
14.06.2019 was evidently bad in law. According to the petitioner, this fact vitiates
all other and subsequent proceedings including the impugned notice dated
30.09.2019.
32. The satisfaction notes now placed on record make it clear that as in
June, 2019, there had been no recording of satisfaction by the IO and thus the
issuance of notice under Section 153C on 14.06.2019 was erroneous since it was
without satisfaction of the condition precedent.
33. In fact, notice dated 14.06.2019 which has been placed in the typed set
filed by petitioner at page 74 has caught Mr.Srinivas by surprise and it was only
after this argument was specifically urged by the petitioner, that additional counter
dated 11.02.2021 has come to be filed by R2 accompanied by a typed set
containing the two satisfaction notes and note for transfer of files from IO to AO.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.35319 of 2019
34. The question that looms large is as to whether the issuance of notice
dated 14.06.2019 without compliance of the statutory pre-condition, would vitiate
all subsequent assessment proceedings including the impugned notice. R2, in his
reply to the petitioner’s rejoinder, reiterates that the procedure followed by the
respondents is in accordance with law.
35. There is no reference in any of the respondents’ pleadings to notice
dated 14.06.2019. The respondents thus disavow notice dated 14.06.2019 and their
case rests on the position that satisfaction notes were drawn up on 30.09.2019 and
it was only parallel and pursuant thereto that the impugned notice under Section
153C dated 30.09.2019 was issued. In this context, attention is drawn to Sections
282 and 282A of the Act as well as Rules 127 and 127A of the Income Tax Rules,
1962 (Rules) to justify the issuance of the impugned notice and to state that proper
procedure has been followed.
36. I am of the considered view that the issuance of the invalid notice
dated 14.06.2019 does not compromise the assessment proceedings as, the
invalid notice is one that does not exist in the eyes of the law and must thus be
ignored. The provisions of Section 282 deal with service of notice in general
terms and Section 282A with the authentication of notices for service by
electronic means. In this case, it is not in dispute that notice dated 30.09.2019
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.35319 of 2019
is a valid notice qua the provisions of Sections 282 and 282A read with Rules
127 and 127A. The issuance of notice dated 14.06.2019 does not vitiate the
impugned proceedings in any way.
37. Though the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Shrikant Mohta V.
Commissioner of Income Tax (414 ITR 270) is placed as part of the compilation, it
has not been referred to in the course of the arguments. An extract from the
Income Tax Business Application Portal is also filed, perhaps to indicate the
transition of proceedings from manual to electronic mode. However, there is no
challenge to the mode of proceedings in this matter.
38. For the aforesaid reasons, the challenge to impugned notices dated
30.09.2019 under Section 153C and show cause notice dated 29.10.2019 is
rejected. Proceedings for assessment shall continue and be concluded in
accordance with law. This Writ Petition is dismissed and connected writ
miscellaneous petitions are closed with no order as to costs.
20.05.2021
Sl
Index: Yes/No
Speaking order/Non Speaking order
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.35319 of 2019
To
1. The Principal Director of Income Tax (Circle 2)
New No. 46 Old No. 108 Nungambakkam High Road
Chennai 600034.
2. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
Central Circle - 2(3) Room No.126,
Investigation Building 46 Mahatama Gandhi Road
Nungambakkam Chennai – 600034.
3. The Deputy Director of Income Tax (INV)
Unit 4(1) Investigation Wing
(Room No. 115 1st Floor) New No. 46,
Old No. 108 Nungambakkam High Road,
Chennai 600034.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.35319 of 2019
Dr.ANITA SUMANTH, J.
sl
W.P. No.35319 of 2019
and
WMP. Nos.36129 & 36130 of 2019
20.05.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
