M/S NIDHI VINCOM PRIVATE LIMITED vs. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT AND ORS

PDF · subscribers
WPO/2303/2022HC CalcuttaWBCHCO003870202213 July 2022Author: HON'BLE JUSTICE MD. NIZAMUDDIN3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that it could not delve into disputed questions of fact and matters of evidence, particularly when the department presented documentary evidence (screenshots from the official portal) indicating that no adjournment petition was filed. The Court also noted that the impugned assessment order was an appealable order under the statute. Therefore, the Court was not inclined to interfere with the assessment order. The writ petition was dismissed on these grounds, without deciding the merits of the adjournment petition or the assessment itself.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, M/s. Nidhi Vincom Private Limited, filed a writ petition challenging an assessment order dated September 8, 2021, passed under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for assessment year 2013-14. The petitioner contended that an adjournment petition filed on September 6, 2021, against the draft assessment order dated August 31, 2021, was not considered by the assessing officer. The petitioner annexed a screenshot as proof. The respondent Income Tax Authority disputed this, presenting official portal records showing no such adjournment petition was filed. The Court noted that the impugned order was appealable under the statute.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court, in its constitutional writ jurisdiction under Article 226, can adjudicate a disputed question of fact regarding the filing of an adjournment petition, which turns on evidence? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that an adjournment petition was filed on September 6, 2021, against the draft assessment order, and this was not considered by the assessing officer, leading to prejudice. They relied on a screenshot as evidence. Revenue's Contention: The respondent Income Tax Authority contended that their office records, as evidenced by screenshots downloaded from the official portal, did not show any such adjournment petition being filed by the petitioner. They disputed the petitioner's claim.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

OD-1 W.P.O. No. 2303 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Original Side M/S. NIDHI VINCOM PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT AND ORS. BEFORE : The Hon’ble JUSTICE MD. NIZAMUDDIN Date : 13th July, 2022. Mr. Anirban Banerjee, Ms. Pradipta Siddhanta, Advs. …for the petitioner Mr. Om Narayan Rai, Adv. …for the respondents The Court : Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties. By this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the impugned assessment order 8th September, 2021 under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 relating to assessment year 2013-14 after issuing draft assessment order dated 31st August, 2021 being annexure P-6 at page 61 of the writ petition on the ground that against the aforesaid draft assessment order petitioner had made adjournment petition on 6th September, 2021 which was not considered by the assessing officer as alleged by the petitioner. Petitioner submits that such adjournment petition was made on 6th September, 2021 and in support of such 2 contention he has annexed a screenshot copy being annexure P-7 at page 68 of the writ petition. Mr. Rai, learned advocate appearing for the respondent Income Tax Authority disputes such allegation of the petitioner by contending that office record of the Income Tax Department does not show filing of any such adjournment petition and in support of his contention he has filed screenshot copies of the several documents downloaded from the official portal of the department to establish that no such adjournment petition was ever filed by the petitioner in the official portal of the department. There cannot be any reason to disbelieve the copies of the screenshot downloaded from the official portal of the Income Tax Department showing that no such adjournment petition was filed by the petitioner though petitioner disputes the same by alleging that it had filed the adjournment petition. This Court siting in exercise of Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution cannot go into this disputed question of facts and matters of evidence in view of the documents filed by the department which was downloaded from the official portal of the department. Furthermore, impugned order is an appealable order under the statute. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as appears from record, submissions of the parties and in view of the discussion made above, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned assessment

3 order dated 8th September, 2021 against which this writ petition being WPO 2303 of 2022 was filed on 27th June, 2022 and the same is accordingly dismissed. (Md. Nizamuddin, J.) TR/

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →