ANITA KOTHARI vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WPT/22/2020HC ChhattisgarhCGHC01044359201916 January 2020Author: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE P. SAM KOSHY2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the writ petition challenging the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act had become infructuous. This was because the Department had subsequently passed a final assessment order on December 18, 2019. The Court observed that the issue had become of academic interest. The ratio decidendi is that a writ petition challenging a pre-assessment notice becomes infructuous once a final assessment order is passed, and the assessee should pursue remedies available against the assessment order, such as filing an appeal. The Court disposed of the writ petition, leaving open the questions raised by the petitioner to be agitated in an appropriate proceeding, including an appeal against the assessment order. No specific relief was granted in the writ petition itself.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Anita Kothari, filed a writ petition challenging a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act. The petition was filed on December 16, 2019. During the proceedings, the counsel for the Department submitted that a final assessment order had been passed on December 18, 2019. The Department presented this order to the Court, which was taken on record. The Court noted that the issue raised in the writ petition had become infructuous due to the subsequent assessment order, which is an appealable order under Section 246A of the Income Tax Act.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the writ petition challenging the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act has become infructuous in light of the subsequent passing of the final assessment order? (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the petitioner's counsel regarding the validity of the Section 148 notice or the subsequent assessment order. The petitioner's challenge was to the notice itself. Revenue's Contention: The Department argued that a final assessment order had been passed on December 18, 2019, rendering the challenge to the Section 148 notice infructuous. They further submitted that the subsequent assessment order is appealable under Section 246A of the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 246A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

-1- NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPT No. 22 of 2020

1.

Anita Kothari, W/o Rajesh Kumar, Aged about: 45 years, R/o 21 Mahavir Colony, Durg, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner Versus

1.

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur – 2, Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2.

The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 1(4), Bhilai ---Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Ashok Patil, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Amit Chaudhari along with Mr. Ajay Kumrani, Advocate :

adfasf Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 17.01.2020

1.

The challenge in the present writ petition is to the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act.

2.

The writ petition was filed on 16.12.2019. Today, when the matter is taken up, the learned counsel for the Department submits that the Department has in the meanwhile passed the final assessment order itself and as such the issue involved in the case has become infructuous and the subsequent order passed on 18.12.2019 is itself an appealable order under Section 246A of the Income Tax Act.

3.

The counsel for the Department produced the order dated 18.12.2019 to the Court, the said order is taken on record.

-2-

4.

In view of the fact that an assessment order has since been passed on 18.12.2019, in the opinion of this Court the matter as such has become of only academic interest. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of leaving open the questions, which were raised by the petitioner in this petition to be agitated in an appropriate proceeding including appeal, which the petitioner may prefer challenging the assessment order.

5.

With the aforesaid observations and liberty, the present writ petition stands disposed of. (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rahul

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →