AANJALI SANDEEP SHETTY vs. THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/26900/2022HC KeralaKLHC01056873202209 March 2023Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that disputes concerning the manner of communication and whether communications were received are not matters that can be adjudicated in proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The court found that the petitioner has an alternate remedy of filing an appeal against the assessment. Therefore, the writ petition was disposed of by directing the petitioner to approach the statutory appellate authority. The appellate authority was directed to consider and pass necessary orders on the petitioner's contentions regarding the lack of proper notice. The appeal, if filed within two weeks from the date of the order, was to be treated as filed within the period of limitation.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Aanjali Sandeep Shetty, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala challenging an income tax assessment. The primary ground for the challenge was the alleged non-compliance with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the petitioner's claim of not being put on notice. The respondent, the Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax/Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, filed a statement, and the petitioner filed a reply affidavit. The court noted a serious dispute regarding the manner of communication and its receipt.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court, in proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, can adjudicate on disputes regarding the manner of communication and its receipt, particularly in the context of alleged non-compliance with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Assessee's contention: The assessment is invalid due to non-compliance with Section 144B and lack of notice. Revenue's contention: Not explicitly recorded in the judgment. The judgment implies the revenue's stance would be that these are factual disputes not suitable for writ jurisdiction.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI THURSDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 18TH PHALGUNA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 26900 OF 2022 PETITIONER: AANJALI SANDEEP SHETTY AGED 37 YEARS BAJAJ EXOTICA APARTMENTS, B BLOCK 1006, OPPOSITE MORE SUPERMARKET, MANAGALORE, PIN - 575005 BY ADVS. HARISANKAR V. MENON MEERA V.MENON R.SREEJITH K.KRISHNA RESPONDENT: THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI, PIN - 100001 BY ADV CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.03.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC No.26900 of 2022 2 T.R. RAVI, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C.) No.26900 of 2022 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 09th day of March, 2023

JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court challenging an assessment on the ground that there is non compliance with the requirement under Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and that he is not put on notice.

2.

A statement has been filed on behalf of the respondent. The petitioner has filed reply affidavit. On reading of the statement and reply affidavit as well as the contents in the writ petition, it is seen that there is serious dispute regarding the manner in which the communications were sent and the question whether they have been received, which are all not matters which can be gone into in a proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner has an alternate remedy of filing an appeal against the assessment. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to approach statutory authority with an appeal placing the contentions regarding the lack of proper notice and the appellate authority shall consider and pass necessary orders. The appeal, if filed within two weeks from today, shall be treated as one filed within the period of limitation. T.R.RAVI JUDGE SKP/09-03

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 26900/2022 PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD. 15-03-2022 EXHIBIT P2 COPYOF ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 DTD. 24-03-2022 RESPONDENT’S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT R(B) TRUE COPY OF THE COMPUTER PRINT OUT SHOWING THE DETAILS OF SMS ALERTS AND EMAIL COMMUNICATIONS SENT TO THE REGISTERED MOBILE NUMBER AND REGISTERED EMAIL ID OF THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT R (A) TRUE COPY OF THE PRINT OUT OF USER PROFILE ADMINISTRATION IN RESPECT OF THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT R(C) TRUE COPY OF THE 1ST PAGE OF THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR AY 2011-12 EXHIBIT R(D) TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE REGISTER OF TRACK CONSIGNMENT OBTAINED FROM THE WEBSITE OF THE POSTAL DEPARTMENT TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →