RAJESHWARI SANGEET ACADEMY TRUST vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS AND ORS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/1252/2022HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01004967202225 February 2022Author: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The Court disposed of the writ petition. It directed the respondents to supply a copy of the approval granted by the Commissioner of Income Tax to the petitioner within a period of ten days. Following the supply of this document, the petitioner would be at liberty to take its remedy in accordance with law. The Court noted that the reasons for reopening had already been supplied. Since the main case was decided, any pending miscellaneous applications were also disposed of. The principle derived is that assessees are entitled to relevant documents, including the Commissioner's approval for reopening, to pursue their remedies effectively.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Rajeshwari Sangeet Academy Trust, filed a writ petition (CWP-1252-2022) challenging a notice dated 31.03.2021 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for reopening of assessment. The petitioner had repeatedly requested the reasons recorded for reopening, which were not supplied. A connected application (CM-2127-CWP-2022) sought a stay of proceedings initiated under the Section 148 notice. The respondents, including the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, accepted notice. On 24.01.2022, the Court had directed the respondents to provide the reasons for reopening. Today, the petitioner's counsel stated that reasons have been supplied but also requested a copy of the approval granted by the Commissioner of Income Tax.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a copy of the approval granted by the Commissioner of Income Tax for reopening the assessment under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961? The petitioner argued that they had requested the reasons for reopening, which were eventually supplied, but they also sought a copy of the Commissioner's approval. The revenue (respondents) did not explicitly argue against this request but agreed to supply the document. No specific authorities or precedents were cited by either party for this specific issue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

CM-2127-CWP-2022 IN/AND CWP-1252-2022 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** CM-2127-CWP-2022 IN/AND CWP-1252-2022 Date of Decision: 25.02.2022 Rajeshwari Sangeet Academy Trust ....Petitioner Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemptions Circle 1, Chandigarh and others

...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN Present : Mr. Salil Kapoor, Advocate, Ms. Soumya Singh, Advocate, Mr. Sumit Lalchandani, Advocate, Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Advocate, for the petitioner. AJAY TEWARI

, J. (Oral)

CM-2127-CWP-2022 This is an application for staying the proceedings initiated pursuant to the impugned notice dated 31.03.2021 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act. Notice of the application. On asking of the Court, Mr. Denesh Goyal, Senior Standing Counsel, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the main case is taken on Board today itself. CWP-1252-2022 On 24.01.2022, the following order was passed:- “Inter alia contends that in spite of repeated requests for supply of reasons recorded for reopening of assessment, it has not been acceded to by the respondents. Notice of motion. Mr. Dinesh Goyal, Senior Standing Counsel for VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI 2022.03.02 15:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CM-2127-CWP-2022 IN/AND CWP-1252-2022 -2- the respondents having advance copy of the petition(s) accepts notice, on the asking of the Court. He prays for time to seek necessary instructions. List on 08.02.2022. Photocopy of this order be placed on the file of connected case.” Today, learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that reasons for reopening have been supplied to the petitioner but he had also made a prayer that a copy of the approval granted by the Commissioner of Income Tax be also supplied. Mr. Goyal has very fairly stated that this copy can also be supplied. In the circumstances, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to supply a copy of the approval granted by the Commissioner of Income Tax within a period of ten days and thereafter, the petitioner would take its remedy in accordance with law. Since the main case has been decided, the pending civil miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE (PANKAJ JAIN) JUDGE 25.02.2022 adhikari Whether speaking/non-speaking : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI 2022.03.02 15:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →