SHRI RADHA MOHAN KHANDELWAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WRW/152/2022HC RajasthanRJHC02050217202220 January 2023Author: MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA,SUDESH BANSAL2 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court clarified its previous order dated 27.05.2022. It held that the reference to the Supreme Court's decision in Union of India & Others Vs. Ashish Agarwal was made to remind the authorities that, with effect from 01.04.2021, the amended scheme of the Income Tax Act, 1961, requires proceedings under Section 148-A to be drawn before issuing a notice under Section 148. The Court explicitly clarified that it did not intend for notices issued in the name of a dead person to be treated as notices under Section 148-A against the legal representative. The Court's intention was solely to emphasize the procedural requirement of Section 148-A before Section 148, in light of the amended statutory scheme. The review petition was disposed of with this clarification.

What were the facts?

This is a review petition filed by Shri Radha Mohan Khandelwal, legal heir of the deceased assessee Smt. Anguri Devi Khandelwal, seeking clarification of a previous order dated 27.05.2022 passed by the High Court in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7896/2022. The petitioner's grievance is that the income tax authorities are misconstruing the directions regarding the scope of liberty granted in the earlier order. Specifically, the petitioner contends that the authorities are not correctly applying the amended provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which require proceedings under Section 148-A before issuing a notice under Section 148. The dispute centers on how notices issued in the name of a deceased person should be treated in light of the amended scheme.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the directions issued by this Court on 27.05.2022, in the context of the amended provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961, require the authorities to first undertake proceedings under Section 148-A of the Act before proceeding under Section 148, particularly when notices were initially issued in the name of a deceased assessee. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argues that the authorities are misinterpreting the Court's previous order and the Supreme Court's decision in Union of India & Others Vs. Ashish Agarwal. They contend that the Court's intent was to mandate adherence to the amended scheme, including Section 148-A, from 01.04.2021 onwards, and that notices issued to a deceased person should be treated in accordance with this amended procedure. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue in this review petition. However, the petitioner's submission implies the revenue is not following the intended procedure.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148-A,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Review Petition No. 152/2022 In D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7896/2022 Shri Radha Mohan Khandelwal, Legal Heir Of Late Smt. Anguri Devi Khandelwal And S/o Of Late Shri Sitaram Khandelwal, Aged About 62 Years, R/o 674 Khandaka Mansion, Bordi Ka Rasta, Kishanpole Bazar Jaipur 302001, Rajasthan India ----Petitioner Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 4, New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur, Rajasthan, 302005 ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sandeep Taneja, Advocate with Mr. Kartikeya Sharma, Advocate HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL

Judgment / Order 20/01/2023 Heard. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that present review petition has been filed seeking clarification because the authorities are misconstruing the directions issued in the order passed by this Court on 27.05.2022 with regard to the scope of liberty. He would submit that this Court only intended to say that with effect from 01.04.2021, the provisions of the Income Tax Act as amended would not be applicable requiring the authority to first take up proceedings under Section 148-A of the Income Tax Act,

(2 of 2) [WRW-152/2022] 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) and if eventuality so arises, to proceed under Section 148 of the Act. The reference to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India & Others Vs. Ashish Agarwal (Civil Appeal No.3005/2022 and batch of appeals) by us while granting liberty was given for the reason that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid judgment has examined the statutory scheme of the Income Tax Act under the amendment with effect from 01.04.2021. This Court did not intend to say that the notices issued in the name of the dead person to be treated as notice under Section 148-A of the Act against the legal representative. We must hasten to clarify this aspect that the reference to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India & Others Vs. Ashish Agarwal (supra) was only to remind the authorities that with effect from 01.04.2021, in view of amended scheme of law, before issuing notice under Section 148 of the Act, proceedings under Section 148-A of the Act are required to be drawn. With the aforesaid clarification, this review petition is disposed off. (SUDESH BANSAL),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),J Mohita /2

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →