ASHABEN RAMESH VALRANI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
SCA/5134/2005HC GujaratGJHC24012186200512 February 2014Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI,HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MS. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI3 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted the developments presented by both parties. The petitioner's counsel indicated that the challenge to the notice under Section 153C would not survive in view of the Supreme Court's decision in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Vijaybhai N. Chandrani. Therefore, the petitioner chose not to press this prayer, with the liberty to raise all contentions before the Assessing Officer. The Court acknowledged that the investigation was complete but the final assessment order was pending due to the interim injunction. Consequently, the petition was disposed of with a liberty to the respondents to pass the final assessment order. However, before passing the final order, the petitioner was to be given an opportunity to raise all contentions and objections, including those related to the proceedings under Section 153C.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Ashaben Ramesh Valrani, filed a Special Civil Application challenging two aspects: an order under Section 127(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax on February 11, 2005, transferring assessment proceedings from Bhavnagar to Ahmedabad, and the validity of a notice issued under Section 153C of the Act. The High Court, by an interim order dated April 20, 2005, restrained the respondents from passing assessment orders for assessment years 1999-2000 to 2004-2005 but allowed investigation to proceed at Bhavnagar. Subsequent developments indicated that the investigation was complete, but the final order was pending due to the injunction.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the order under Section 127(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, transferring the assessment proceedings of the petitioner from Bhavnagar to Ahmedabad is valid? 2. Whether the notice issued under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is valid? Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner's counsel, Shri Kazi, submitted that in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Vijaybhai N. Chandrani (2013) 357 ITR 713 (SC), the challenge to the notice under Section 153C would not survive. Consequently, the petitioner would not press this prayer, reserving the right to raise all contentions before the Assessing Officer. Revenue's Contentions: The revenue's counsel, Ms. Bhatt, pointed out that the investigation at Bhavnagar had been completed but the final order was delayed due to the interim injunction.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 127(2),Section 153C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
C/SCA/5134/2005 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5134 of 2005 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI and HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI ================================================================ 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ================================================================ ASHABEN RAMESH VALRANI....Petitioner(s) Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & 1....Respondent(s) ================================================================ Appearance: MR KH KAJI, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR MANISH K KAJI, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MRS MAUNA M BHATT, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1 - 2 ================================================================ CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI and Page 1 of 3 C/SCA/5134/2005 JUDGMENT HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI Date : 12/02/2014

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI)

1.

This petition was filed with two separate prayers. One was challenging an order under section 127(2) of the Income Tax   Act   passed   by   respondent   no.1   on   11.2.2005 transferring the assessment proceedings of the petitioner from   Bhavnagar   to   Ahmedabad.   The   second   prayer pertains to validity of notice under section 153C of the Act.

2.

By an interim order dated 20.4.2005, this Court restrained the   respondents   from   passing   assessment   order   for   the assessment year 1999­2000 to 2004­2005 but permitted respondent   no.2   to   carry   out   necessary   investigation, ensuring   that   such   investigation   shall   take   place   at Bhavnagar.

3.

Learned advocates for parties have brought to our notice certain developments which took place after the said order dated 20.4.2005 was passed. Ms. Bhatt pointed out that the entire investigation at Bhavnagar has been completed but the final  order has not  been passed  due to interim injunction.   Learned   counsel   Shri   Kazi   for   the   petitioner pointed out that in view of a recent decision of Supreme Court   in   case   of  Commissioner   of   Income   Tax   v. Vijaybhai   N.   Chandrani  reported   in   (2013)   357   ITR 713(SC),   the   petitioner’s   challenge   to   the   notice   under section 153C of the Act before the High Court would not C/SCA/5134/2005 JUDGMENT survive. He would not press such prayer keeping the right of the petitioner open to raise all contentions before the Assessing Officer.

4.

In view of such developments, this petition is disposed of with     a   liberty   to   respondents   to   pass   final   order   of assessment for the said assessment years, however, before which   the   petitioner   would   be   given   an   opportunity   of raising   all   contentions   and   objections   including   with respect to proceeding under section 153C of the Act.

5.

With above directions petition is disposed of.

(AKIL KURESHI, J.) (MS SONIA GOKANI, J.) raghu

More judgments on Section 127(2)

All 68 judgments and leading authorities on Section 127(2) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →