ALKA KOTAHWALA W/O SHRI PRAMOD KOTAHWALA vs. PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
CW/9674/2024HC RajasthanRJHC02049683202427 August 2024Author: PANKAJ BHANDARI,ASHUTOSH KUMAR2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition based on a statement made by the respondents' counsel. The respondents were directed to supply the satisfaction note and relevant material to the petitioner within four weeks. Upon receipt of this material, the petitioner was granted a period of four weeks to file her reply or objections. The court did not decide on the validity of the Section 153C notices themselves but facilitated a procedural step to allow the petitioner to respond. The ratio decidendi is that procedural fairness, including providing necessary documents for a taxpayer to respond, is paramount, and the court can direct such steps to ensure a fair process. No issue was expressly left undecided, as the petition was disposed of based on the agreed-upon procedure.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Alka Kotahwala, filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, challenging notices issued to her under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act. The respondents are the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax and the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax. The assessment years are not specified. The procedural history involves the issuance of the notices under Section 153C, which are the subject of the challenge. The matter came before the High Court for adjudication.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notices issued under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are valid and have been issued in accordance with the law? (Question of law and fact, concerning Section 153C). The petitioner's contention, as implied by filing the writ petition, is that the notices are likely flawed or premature. The revenue's contention, as presented by their counsel, is that the process will be followed correctly. Specifically, the revenue's counsel stated that the satisfaction note along with relevant material would be supplied to the petitioner, allowing her to submit a reply within thirty days. No specific legal arguments or precedents were detailed by either side in the judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
[2024:RJ-JP:35917-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9674/2024 Alka Kotahwala, W/o Shri Pramod Kotahwala, Aged About 66 Years, R/o Kotahwala Building, Kotahwala Market, Tripolia Bazar, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jeevan Nidhi-2, LIC Building, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur, Rajasthan, 302005 2. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Room No. 410, 4Th Floor, Jeevan Nidhi-2, LIC Building, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur, Rajasthan, 302005 ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bipin Gupta, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Siddharth Bapna, Adv.with Mr. Meyhul Mittal, Mr. Sarvesh Jain HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

Order 28/08/2024

1.

Petitioner has filed this writ petition aggrieved by the notices issued under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act.

2.

It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for the respondents that the satisfaction note along with relevant material would be supplied to the petitioner and she can thereafter, submit her reply/ objections to the notices within thirty days.

3.

In view of the statement made by counsel for the respondents, the present writ petition is disposed of.

[2024:RJ-JP:35917-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-9674/2024]

4.

Respondents are directed to supply the satisfaction note and the relevant material to the petitioner within a period of four weeks. On receipt of the relevant material and satisfaction note, petitioner is required to file her reply within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the satisfaction note and relevant material.

5.

Pending applications, if any, stand disposed. (ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J (PANKAJ BHANDARI),J CHANDAN /37

More judgments on Section 153C

All 9,619 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →