DEVENDRA AGARWAL S/O SHRI SURAJ NARAYAN AGARWAL vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
CW/3507/2023HC RajasthanRJHC02016267202301 May 2023Author: MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA,ANIL KUMAR UPMAN2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court declined to entertain the writ petition. It reasoned that the authority passing the order under Section 148A(d) did not act without jurisdiction, as a show cause notice was issued and an order was passed thereafter. While the petitioner alleged that certain documents were not supplied and that the opportunity of hearing was not proper, the Court found that the order under Section 148A(d) was passed based on subsequent information regarding alleged fake supply claims without actual movement of goods. Given these circumstances and the subsequent passing of the final assessment order on 03.03.2023, the Court was not inclined to exercise its discretionary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner was advised to avail the statutory remedy of appeal against the final assessment order. The period during which the writ petition remained pending was directed to be excluded for filing the appeal.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Devendra Agarwal, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 29.03.2022 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, concerning the reopening of his assessment. This was followed by a notice under Section 148 of the Act. The petitioner argued that additions were made without a proper opportunity for hearing and that details of sales and purchases previously assessed under Section 143(3) were being re-investigated based on new allegations of fake supply claims without actual movement of goods. The respondents are the Income Tax Officer and the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax. The assessment year is not explicitly stated.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should entertain a writ petition challenging an order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, when a final assessment order has subsequently been passed, and the petitioner alleges lack of proper opportunity of hearing and re-investigation of previously assessed matters. Assessee's Contentions: - The writ petition is maintainable even after the final assessment order due to exceptional circumstances, specifically the alleged lack of proper opportunity of hearing and the re-investigation of previously assessed sales and purchases based on new allegations. Revenue's Contentions: - The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 148,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
[2023/RJJP/008798] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3507/2023 Devendra Agarwal S/o Shri Suraj Narayan Agarwal, Resident Of 7, Shanti Path Mangala Marg, Brahmpuri, Jaipur (Rajasthan) - 302001. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The Income Tax Officer, Ward- 5(1), New Central Revenue Building, Bhagwan Dass Road, Jaipur - 302005 (Rajasthan). 2. The Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jaipur- 2, New Central Revenue Building, Bhagwan Dass Road, Jaipur - 302005 (Rajasthan) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shafi Mohammad Chouhan Advocate through Video Conferencing. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sandeep Pathak Advocate. HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

Judgment 01/05/2023 Heard. This petition is directed against the order dated 29.03.2022 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1961’) in the matter of reopening of assessment, followed by notice under Section 148 of the Act of 1961. Today, when the matter comes up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner informed the Court that on 03.03.2023 final assessment order has been passed. He would submit that notwithstanding passing of assessment order, present is one of those exceptional cases where the Writ

[2023/RJJP/008798] (2 of 2) [CW-3507/2023] Court may entertain the petition because the additions have been made earlier without granting proper opportunity of hearing. It is also the case of he petitioner that the details of sales and purchases made earlier which were subjected to scrutiny & assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act of 1961 are sought to be re-investigated on the basis of certain new allegations. It is not a case where the authority, who passed the order, has acted without jurisdiction. The petitioner was given a show cause notice and, thereafter, the order has been passed. Allegation is not of total absence of opportunity of hearing that certain documents, which the petitioner was claiming, were not supplied. After going through the order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act of 1961, we find that on subsequent information regarding fake supply claim without actual movements of goods, as alleged, order has been passed. Therefore, in these circumstances, we are not inclined to entertain this petition in exercise of our discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner would be at liberty to invoke statutory remedy of appeal against the order passed in fresh assessment order on 03.03.023. This petition is, accordingly, dismissed with the aforesaid liberty. Before parting with the case, it is observed that the period during which this petition remained pending before this Court shall be excluded in the matter of filing appeal against the assessment dated 03.03.2023. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),ACTING CJ SANJAY KUMAWAT-11

More judgments on Section 148A

All 3,543 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →