ZARINA BEGUM vs. THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES

WP(C)/29207/2022HC KeralaKLHC01061905202209 February 2023Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Zarina Begum, an NRI, filed a writ petition challenging the assessment order (Ext.P13) issued by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi. The petitioner's grievance was that the procedure prescribed under Section 144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was not followed. The case was initially handled by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer before being transferred to the National Faceless Assessment Centre. The respondents are the Central Board of Direct Taxes, Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, and Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax. The assessment was completed without adhering to the statutory procedure under Section 144C, causing difficulties for the petitioner in presenting her case.

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the procedure prescribed under Section 144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was not followed in the assessment proceedings against the petitioner. The Court found that the petitioner was entitled to have the assessment carried out following the statutory prescription. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the assessment order (Ext.P13) was set aside. The appropriate authority was directed to complete the assessment after following the procedure prescribed by law. The Court did not explicitly mention any issue left undecided, but the operative direction was to re-do the assessment following the correct procedure.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the procedure prescribed under Section 144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was followed in the assessment proceedings against the petitioner. Assessee's contention: The petitioner argued that the procedure under Section 144C was not followed, which caused difficulties in properly setting forth her case before the authorities. The petitioner is an NRI and was entitled to have the assessment carried out following the statutory prescription. Revenue's contention: The judgment notes that the fact that the procedure under Section 144C has not been followed is virtually admitted by the revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI THUR AY, THE 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023 / 20TH MAGHA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 29207 OF 2022 PETITIONER: ZARINA BEGUM AGED 68 YEARS, W/O.MUNVAR KHAN, 1/1074 A, JAWAHAR MANZIL, KUNNUMPURAM, FORT KOCHI, KOCHI 682001, REPRESENTED BY HER POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MR.T.A.JAFFAR, AGED 78 YEARS, S/O.LATE T.M.ABDULAZEEZ, HOUSE NO.2-550-A, KALVATHY FORT KOCHI, KOCHI, PIN - 682001 BY ADV VINOD KUMAR P.R. RESPONDENTS: 1 THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NORTH BLOCK, CENTRAL SECRETARIAT, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001 2 PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KERALA REGION, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDINGS, I.S.PRESS ROAD, KOCHI, PIN - 682018 3 THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI, PIN - 110001 4 THE ASSISTANT CO

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 144C

All 3,666 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →