M/S SARDA ENERGY AND MINERALS LIMITED vs. COMMISSIONER, INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX OFFICE

PDF · subscribers
WPT/233/2018HC ChhattisgarhCGHC01035529201804 December 2018Author: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA2 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the petitioner's appeal against the Commissioner's order under Section 263 was pending before the ITAT, Raipur Bench, but could not be heard due to a vacancy. The petitioner sought a transfer of the appeal to ITAT, Mumbai, and a stay on assessment proceedings under Section 147 for AY 2008-09. The Revenue proposed that assessment proceedings could be completed, but the final order would be kept in abeyance until the ITAT heard the appeal. The Court found this proposal to be fair and acceptable to the petitioner. Therefore, the Writ Petition was ordered accordingly, implying that the assessment proceedings would continue but the final order would be deferred.

What were the facts?

M/s Sarda Energy And Minerals Limited (the petitioner) filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Raipur Bench, challenging an order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act. Due to a vacancy at the ITAT, Raipur Bench, the petitioner's appeal could not be heard. Consequently, the petitioner filed a writ petition seeking a transfer of their appeal to the ITAT, Mumbai, and a direction to the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (ACIT), Raipur, to refrain from passing any assessment order under Section 147 for assessment year 2008-09 until the ITAT appeal was decided. The Revenue proposed that assessment proceedings could be completed, but the final order would be held in abeyance until the ITAT heard the appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner's appeal against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act should be transferred to the ITAT, Mumbai, due to a vacancy at the ITAT, Raipur Bench? The petitioner argued for the transfer to ensure their appeal is heard. The Revenue did not contest this point directly but proposed an alternative solution. 2. Whether the Assessing Officer (ACIT), Raipur, should be restrained from passing any assessment order under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act for assessment year 2008-09 until the disposal of the petitioner's appeal before the ITAT? The petitioner sought this injunction to prevent adverse action while their primary appeal was pending. The Revenue proposed that assessment proceedings could be completed, but the final order would be kept in abeyance.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPT No. 233 of 2018 M/s Sarda Energy And Minerals Limited A Company Duly Registered Under The Companies Act, 1956/2013, Having Its Works At Industrial Growth Center, Phase-1, Siltara, Raipur, Chhattisgarh And Registered Office At 73/A, Central Avenue, Nagpur (Mh) 440018, Through Its Authorized Signatory And Director Mr. Padam Kumar Jain S/o Shri Late M C Jain About 55 Years, R/o Flat No. B-501, Ashoka Ratan, Vidhan Sabha, Mova, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner Versus

1.

Commissioner, Income Tax, Income Tax Office Aayakar Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2.

Assistant Commissioner Income Tax, Central Circle-I, Raipur, (ACIT)

3.

Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central) Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh.

4.

President Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 10th And 11th Floor, Loknayak Bhawan, Khan Market, New Delhi 110003 ---- Respondent For Petitioner : Shri Neelabh Dubey, Advocate. For Respondents : Smt. Naushina Afrin Ali, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 05/12/2018 :

1.

The petitioner's appeal against the order passed by the Commissioner, Income Tax, Raipur under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act (for short 'the Act') is pending consideration before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Raipur Bench. However, there being a vacancy in the said office, the petitioner's appeal is not taken up for hearing. Therefore, the petitioner has preferred this writ petition seeking a direction to the respondents to transfer

2 his appeal to the ITAT, Mumbai with further direction to the Assessing Officer (ACIT), Raipur not to pass any assessment order against the petitioner under Section 147 of the Act for the assessment year 2008-09 till the disposal of the appeal before the ITAT.

2.

Learned counsel for the Revenue would propose that let the assessment proceedings be completed but the final order would be kept in abeyance till the petitioner's appeal is heard by the ITAT, Raipur Bench.

3.

The proposal being fair, the petitioner would accept the same.

4.

In view of the above, the Writ Petition is ordered accordingly. Judge (Prashant Kumar Mishra) Barve

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →