PADAM GUPTA & ORS vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ORS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/10139/2017HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01078170201715 December 2017Author: MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA,MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA2 pages
AI SummaryDisposed of

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the Income Tax Return for Assessment Year 2017-18 had not been filed by the petitioner. In view of this, the Court deemed it appropriate that the revenue shall take appropriate proceedings in accordance with law. The writ petition was accordingly disposed of. The Court did not make any specific finding on the entitlement to the release of cash or the framing of assessment, as the primary issue raised by the revenue was the non-filing of the return. The operative direction was for the revenue to proceed as per law, given the non-compliance with the notice for filing the return. No issue was expressly left undecided; the petition was disposed of based on the procedural non-compliance.

What were the facts?

The petitioners, Padam Gupta and others, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking directions for the release of cash amounting to ₹90,00,000. This cash had been requisitioned and deposited in a personal deposit account by invoking powers under Section 132A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioners also requested directions for the authorities to frame the assessment. However, it was brought to the court's attention that petitioner No. 1, Padam Gupta, had not yet filed the Income Tax Return for Assessment Year 2017-18, despite receiving a notice under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act on August 31, 2017.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioners are entitled to directions for the release of cash amounting to ₹90,00,000, requisitioned under Section 132A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and deposited in a personal deposit account? (Question of law and fact, turning on Section 132A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961). Assessee's contention: The petitioners sought directions for the release of the cash and for the framing of the assessment. Revenue's contention: The Revenue pointed out that the Income Tax Return for Assessment Year 2017-18 had not been filed by petitioner No. 1, Padam Gupta, despite a notice under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act being issued on August 31, 2017. The Revenue requested time-bound directions for filing the return.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 132A(1),Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

CWP-10139-2017 1 214 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-10139-2017 Date of decision : 15.12.2017 Padam Gupta and others ... Petitioner(s) Versus Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Jalandhar and others ... Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL Present: Mr. J.S. Bhasin, Advocate and Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Rajesh Sethi, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Arun Biriwal, Advocate for the respondent(s)-Revenue. **** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (ORAL) The petitioners have approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for directions to respondent Nos.1 to 5 for releasing cash amounting to ` 90,00,000/-, which was requisitioned and deposited in personal deposit account by invoking powers under Section 132A (1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that a direction be issued to the authorities to frame the assessment.

3.

However, it was pointed out through the communication addressed to learned counsel for the respondent(s)-revenue that petitioner No.1-Padam Gupta, has not even filed the Income Tax Return for the Assessment Year 2017-18 so far, despite issuance of notice under Section Yogesh Sharma 2017.12.19 12:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-10139-2017 2 142(1) of the Income Tax Act on 31.08.2017 to file the return. A prayer was made that a time-bound direction be issued.

4.

In view of above, we deem it appropriate that since the Income Tax Return for the Assessment Year 2017-18 has not been filed, the appropriate proceedings shall be taken by the revenue in accordance with law.

5.

The present writ petition stands disposed of. ( AJAY KUMAR MITTAL ) JUDGE 15.12.2017 Yogesh Sharma ( AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/ No Whether Reportable Yes/ No Yogesh Sharma 2017.12.19 12:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

More judgments on Section 142(1)

All 17,244 judgments and leading authorities on Section 142(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →