RAVINDRA BHAGORAO DANGE vs. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX AND ANOTHER

PDF · subscribers
WP/113/2024HC BombayHCBM03048018202322 January 2024Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAVINDRA V. GHUGE,HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE Y. G. KHOBRAGADE2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, disposed of the writ petition by referring to its recent order dated January 8, 2024, in Writ Petition No. 10075/2023 (Satguru Sai Extrusions Private Limited vs. Union of India and others). The Court stated that the law has crystallized to the effect that an assessee, like the Petitioner, can raise all grounds and contentions, and these can be considered while hearing the proceedings under Section 148-A. The operative direction was to dispose of the writ petition in light of this established legal position.

What were the facts?

The Petitioner, Ravindra Bhagorao Dange, received a notice under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated May 23, 2022, granting two weeks for a reply. The Petitioner did not respond. Consequently, the Income Tax Department passed an order under Section 148A(d) on July 20, 2022. The Petitioner has filed a writ petition challenging this order. The matter was heard by the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Petitioner is entitled to raise all grounds and contentions during proceedings under Section 148-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, despite not filing a written reply to the notice under Section 148A(b)? Assessee's Contention: The Petitioner, through their learned counsel, implicitly argues that they should be allowed to raise all grounds and contentions. This is inferred from the Court's reference to a previous order which states that such grounds can be considered during Section 148-A proceedings. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondents (The Principal Chief Commissioner Income Tax and Another).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A(b),Section 148A(d),Section 148-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

*1* 10wp113o24 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 10 WRIT PETITION NO. 113 OF 2024 RAVINDRA BHAGORAO DANGE VERSUS THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX AND ANOTHER ... Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr.P.D. Bachate i/by Mr. Jadhavar Shivprasad G. Advocate for Respondents 1 and 2 : Mr. Alok Sharma ...

CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE &

Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ. DATE :- 22nd January, 2024 Per Court :- 1. Heard the learned Advocates for the respective sides and perused the petition paper book with their assistance. 2. The Petitioner was undisputedly served with the notice under Section 148(A)(b) of the Income Tax Act dated 23.05.2022. Two weeks time was granted to the Petitioner to reply. The Petitioner did not respond. The Income Tax Department finally passed the order after almost two months on 20.07.2022. Admittedly, the Petitioner did not tender any written reply. Consequentially, the order under Section 148A(d) has been 2024:BHC-AUG:1635-DB

*2* 10wp113o24 passed. 3. Considering the recent order dated 08.01.2024 delivered by this Court in Writ Petition No.10075/2023 (Satguru Sai Extrusions Private Limited vs. Union of India and others), this Writ Petition is disposed off. 4. Needless to state, the law has crystallized that such an Assessee as like the Petitioner herein, can raise all grounds and contentions and the same can be considered while hearing the proceedings under Section 148-A. kps (Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)

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 →