BALJIT SINGH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER AND ORS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/4818/2023HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01030858202323 March 2023Author: MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI,MRS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the writ petition. The Court held that the show cause notice under Section 148A(b) and the consequential notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, both dated March 21, 2022, were set aside. The reasoning was based on the petitioner's contention that the mandatory seven-day period required under Section 148A(b) for providing a reply to the show cause notice had not been complied with by the respondents, who had uploaded the notice on March 21, 2022, and given only four days for the petitioner to appear. The Court granted liberty to the respondents to proceed in accordance with law as per Section 148A(b) after giving due opportunity to the petitioner. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Baljeet Singh, filed a writ petition challenging a show cause notice under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and a consequential notice under Section 148 of the Act, both dated March 21, 2022. The petitioner contended that the show cause notice was uploaded on March 21, 2022, and the petitioner was given only four days to appear in the respondent's office on March 25, 2022. The petitioner argued that Section 148A(b) mandates a minimum of seven days' time for providing a reply to such a notice, and this mandatory provision was not complied with by the Income Tax Officer and others (respondents).

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice issued under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is invalid for providing less than the mandatory seven days' time for reply, as stipulated by the provision? (Question of law and fact, concerning Section 148A(b)). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the seven-day period stipulated in Section 148A(b) for providing a reply to the show cause notice is mandatory and was not complied with by the respondents, as only four days were given. The petitioner relied on the provisions of Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the revenue (Income Tax Officer and Others) on this issue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A(b),Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

2023:PHHC:044453-DB 117+111

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CM No.4931-CWP of 2023 in/and CWP No.4818 of 2023(O&M) Date of Decision: 23.03.2023

Baljeet Singh

..…... Petitioner V/s. Income Tax Officer and Others

….....Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI

HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI

*** Present: Mr. Rana Gurtej Singh, Advocate

for the petitioner.

Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Sr. Standing counsel with

Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, Jr. Standing counsel for the respondents.

*** Ritu Bahri, J (Oral)

Learned counsel for the State has informed the Court that the show cause under Section 148A(b) of Income Tax Act, 1961, was uploaded on the portal on 21.03.2022 and the petitioner was given 04 days time to appear in the office of the respondent(s) on 25.03.2022. Learned counsel for the petitioner further states that as per the provisions of Section 148A(b) 07 days time is required to be given for giving reply to this notice and this provision is mandatory which has not been complied with, by the respondent(s).

Keeping in view the above fact, the present petition is allowed and the order and notice (Annexure P1) under Section 148(b) and consequential notice (Annexure P2) dated 21.03.2022 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is being set aside. However, liberty is granted to the respondents to proceed, in accordance with law as per Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner.

Pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of.

23rd March, 2023

(RITU BAHRI) Sonia Puri

JUDGE

(AMARJOT BHATTI)

JUDGE SONIA PURI 2023.03.27 10:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment

More judgments on Section 148A(b)

All 524 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148A(b) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →