CHERUPURATH MOHAMMED JEENS, vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/19373/2023HC KeralaKLHC01042183202326 February 2024Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D. K. SINGH6 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the assessment order did not suffer from any jurisdictional error or violation of the principles of natural justice. The Court noted that the petitioner's written submissions and replies to show cause notices were indeed considered before the assessment order was finalized. Therefore, in the exercise of its limited jurisdiction of judicial review, the Court found no grounds to interfere with the impugned order. The Court disposed of the writ petition, granting the petitioner liberty to approach the Appellate Authority against the assessment order if they were so advised. All contentions were kept open for the petitioner to raise in the appeal. The time spent prosecuting the writ petition was to be condoned for the purpose of filing an appeal, and the Appellate Authority was directed to consider the appeal expeditiously.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Cherupurath Mohammed Jeens, filed a writ petition challenging an assessment order for assessment year 2013-14, dated May 19, 2023. This order was passed after the assessment was re-opened under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner had initially filed a return declaring a total income of Rs. 64,990/-. However, the assessment order noted fictitious profits of Rs. 2,46,54,850/- in commodity trading that were not reflected in the original return. A notice under Section 148A(d) was issued on July 22, 2022, followed by a notice under Section 148 requiring the petitioner to file a revised return. The petitioner submitted written submissions and replies to show cause notices, which were considered before the final assessment order was passed.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessment order for assessment year 2013-14, passed after re-opening under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, suffers from jurisdictional error or violation of principles of natural justice. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the assessment order was passed without considering their request for an adjournment, as evidenced by Ext.P10, and without any communication regarding this request. The petitioner contended that the assessment order was passed arbitrarily without proper consideration of their submissions. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through the Income Tax Officer and Assessment Unit, contended that the assessment order was passed after considering the petitioner's written submissions and replies to show cause notices. They argued that the assessment followed due process and did not violate principles of natural justice or jurisdiction.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 148A(d)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH MONDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 7TH PHALGUNA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 19373 OF 2023 PETITIONER: CHERUPURATH MOHAMMED JEENS, AGED 46 YEARS S/O C.P MUHAMMED, KMC, 25/534 ALANKAR BUILDING, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 686691 BY ADVS. DIVYA RAVINDRAN JOSEPH MARKOSE (SR.)(J-383) RESPONDENTS: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1 & TPS, MAHIMA TOWER, TEMPLE ROAD, THODUPUZHA, KERALA, PIN - 685588 2 ASSESSMENT UNIT, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTER, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT,MINISTRY OF FINANCE, ROOM NO. 401, 2ND FLOOR,E-RAMP, JAWAHARLAL STADIUM,NEW DELHI-110003, REPRESENTED BY ITS INCOME TAX OFFICE 3 THE NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, MAYUR BHAWAN, CONNAUGHT LANE,BARAKHAMBA ROAD,NEW DELHI -110001,REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (NAFAC) 4 GEOJIT COMTRADE LTD., 10TH FLOOR, GEOJIT FINANCIAL SERVICES BUILDING 34/659- P, CIVIL PIPELINE ROAD,PADIVATTOM, KOCHI-682024, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER- LEGAL. BY ADV CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC No 19373 of 2023 2 JUDGMENT Dated this the 26th day of February, 2024 The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner impugning Ext.P11 assessment order for the assessment year 2013-14 dated 19.05.2023 after the assessment was re-opened under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner requested for adjournment of hearing by Ext.P10. However, without any communication on request of the petitioner, the impugned order has been passed. 3. The assessment order would disclose that the petitioner had filed return of his income for the assessment year 2013-14 on 31.03.2014 declaring total income of Rs.64,990/- and the fictitious profits in commodity trading amounting to Rs.2,46,54,850/- and the said profit was not reflected in the return of income filed by the petitioner. The petitioner was issued notice under Section 148, after the order came to be passed WPC No 19373 of 2023 3 under Section 148A(d) on 22.07.2022 by the jurisdictional assessing officer, a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was issued to the petitioner, requiring him to file return on re-opening of the case of the petitioner. The petitioner also filed written submissions, which is evident from the assessment order itself under challenge. The details of opportunities given to the petitioner are extracted in the impugned order. After considering the replies to the show cause notices and the written submissions, the assessment order impugned in the present writ petition has been finalized. 4. The petitioner has the remedy of filing an appeal against the assessment order. This Court does not find that the assessment order suffers from any jurisdictional error or in violation of the principles of the natural justice inasmuch as the petitioner’s written submissions have been considered and all the replies to the notices given have also been considered. Once this Court finds that the order is not without jurisdiction or in violation of the principles of the natural justice or illegal WPC No 19373 of 2023 4 on the face of records, this Court in exercise of its limited jurisdiction of the judicial review, cannot interfere with

the impugned order. In view thereof, the present writ petition is disposed of, with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Appellate Authority against the said order, if he is so advised. All contentions are kept open to the petitioner to be taken in the appeal. The time spent in prosecuting this writ petition shall be condoned while considering the application for condoning the delay in filing the appeal. If the petitioner files the appeal, the Appellate Authority shall consider the appeal, expeditiously. DINESH KUMAR SINGH JUDGE AP APPENDIX OF WP(C) 19373/2023 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 THEOF THE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 148A (B) OF THE ACT DATED 23.05.2022 BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P2 THEOF THE ORDER ISSUED UNDER SECTION 148A(D) OF THE ACT DATED 22.07.2022. Exhibit P3 THEOF THE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT DATED 22.07.2022 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P4 THEOF THE RETURN FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN LIEU OF THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT DATED 13.08.2022. Exhibit P5 THEOF THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 142(1) OF THE ACT ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 09.01.2023. Exhibit P6 THEOF THE REPLY 21.1.2023 FILED BEFORE

THE 2ND

RESPONDENT

WITH ACKNOWLEDGEMENT NUMBER- 929102901210123. Exhibit P7 THEOF THE DRAFT ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR AY 2013-14 DATED 26.04.2023. Exhibit P8 THEOF THE REPLY FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 1.5.2023 ALONG WITH THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT. Exhibit P9 THEOF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 08.05.2023 . Exhibit P10 THE ADJOURNMENT REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER AGAINST THE VIDEO CONFERENCE DATED 26.4.2023 Exhibit P11 THEOF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 147 R.W.S 144B OF THE ACT DATED 19.05.2023 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P12 THEOF THE SCREEN SHOT OF THE E- FILING PORTAL OF THE PETITIONER, SHOWING THE PRESENT STATUS. Exhibit P13 THEOF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 22.05.2022. Exhibit P14of the acknowledgment of the reply filed by the petitioner to the notice dated 23.05.2022 Exhibit P15of judgement in W.P( C) No. 34046/2023 of this Hon'ble Court in case of M/s Alankar Spices dated 23.05.2023 for AY 2014-15

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →