Som Prakash Garg And Anr. vs. The Commissioner Of Income Tax And Anr.

PDF · subscribers
WP/12083/2012HC Madhya Pradesh03 January 2013Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHANTANU KEMKAR2 pages
For Petitioner: B.M. Maheshwari
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal noted the submissions of both parties. The petitioner was granted liberty to submit an appropriate application to the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax within ten days from the date of the order. The Assistant Commissioner was directed to consider this application and take an appropriate decision in accordance with the law as expeditiously as possible, but not later than two weeks from its receipt. Until such a decision was taken, the respondents were restrained from taking any coercive steps against the petitioner for the recovery of the balance amount. The petition was disposed of based on these directions.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Mr. B.M. Maheshwari, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging a notice dated 17/12/2012 issued under Section 226(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner had obtained a loan from M/s Empire Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., Indore, which was repayable by July 2013. The petitioner expressed readiness to clear the outstanding dues in installments by July 31, 2013. The respondents' counsel stated that an appropriate application to the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax would be considered.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice issued under Section 226(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is valid in light of the petitioner's proposal to repay the loan in installments by July 31, 2013. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the loan was repayable by July 2013 and they were prepared to clear the balance amount through installments by that date, implying the notice was premature or unduly harsh. Revenue's Contention: The respondents, through their counsel, indicated that if the petitioner made an appropriate application to the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, it would be considered, and a decision would be taken accordingly.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 226(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

W.P. no. 12083/2012 03/01/2013 Mr. B.M. Maheshwari, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri R.L. Jain, Sr. Advocate along with Ms. Veena Mandlik, learned counsel for the respondents. By filing this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged notice issued by respondent on 17/12/2012 ( Annexure- P/1 ) under section 226(3) of Income Tax Act, 1961. According to the petitioner, loan which was obtained by the petitioner from M/s Empire Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd, Indore was repayable by July, 2013. In that circumstance, according to the petitioner, they are ready to make clear amount which is balanced towards the outstanding dues of M/s Empire Infrastructures Pvt Ltd, but by way of some installments payable upto 31st July, 2013. Learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the respondents submits that if the petitioner makes appropriate application in that regard to the Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, the respondent no. 2, the same shall be considered and appropriate decision in that regard shall be taken. In view of the aforesaid stand taken by the parties, we are inclined to give liberty to the petitioner to submit appropriate application in that regard within ten days from today. On submission of such application, second respondent shall consider and take appropriate decision on it in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, but not later by two weeks from its receipts. Till appropriate decision as aforesaid is taken by

respondent no. 2, respondents shall not take any coercive steps against the petitioner for recovery of the balance amount. The petition stands disposed of. C c as per rules.

( SHANTANU KEMKAR ) ( M.C. GARG ) JUDGE JUDGE

amol

More judgments on Section 226(3)

All 95 judgments and leading authorities on Section 226(3) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →