DADASAHEB NARAYANRAO MANMADKAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER AND ANR.

PDF · subscribers
WP/1399/2006HC BombayHCBM07006839200614 March 2006Author: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE J.P. DEVADHAR,HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE R.M. LODHA3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that it would have been proper for the petitioner to file objections before the Assessing Officer regarding the reopening of the assessment for AY 2003-2004 before approaching the High Court. Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petition with specific directions. The petitioner was granted liberty to file objections to the reopening within three weeks. If objections were filed, the Assessing Officer was directed to dispose of them by passing a speaking order. Furthermore, the Assessing Officer was restrained from proceeding with the assessment for AY 2003-2004 for a period of four weeks from the date of communication of the order disposing of the petitioner's objections. The core principle is that procedural remedies available to the assessee should be exhausted before invoking the writ jurisdiction of the High Court.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Dadasaheb Narayanrao Manmadkar, challenged a notice dated January 20, 2005, issued by the Income Tax Officer under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for reopening the assessment for Assessment Year 2003-2004. The Assessing Officer had provided the reasons for reopening to the petitioner. The Bombay High Court noted that the Apex Court in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. Income-Tax Officer, 259 ITR 19, held that after disclosure of reasons for reopening, the assessee can file objections, which the Assessing Officer must dispose of by a speaking order. The petitioner had not filed any objections before approaching the High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should entertain a writ petition challenging a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for reopening assessment for AY 2003-2004, when the assessee has not first filed objections before the Assessing Officer? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner sought to impugn the notice under Section 148. The judgment does not explicitly record the petitioner's arguments beyond this, but implies a challenge to the reopening itself. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not explicitly record the revenue's arguments. However, the court's observation regarding the necessity of filing objections suggests the revenue would likely rely on the procedural remedy available to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.1399 OF 2006 Dadasaheb Narayanrao Manmadkar .. Petitioner v/s. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(4), Pandharpur and another. .. Respondents Mr.S.S.Patwardhan for the petitioner. Mr.Ashok Kotangale for the respondents. CORAM : R.M. LODHA & J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 14TH MARCH, 2006. P.C. Heard Mr.S.S.Patwardhan, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Ashok Kotangale, the learned counsel for the respondents. 2. The petitioner seeks to impugn the notice dated 20th January, 2005 issued by the Assessing Officer under section 148 of the Income Tax Act for reopening the assessment for the assessment year 2003-2004. It is not in dispute that the Assessing Officer has now furnished the reasons to the petitioner. In GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. Income-Tax 2 Officer and others, 259 ITR 19, the Apex Court has observed that once the reasons for reopening of assessments under section 148 of the Income Tax Act are disclosed, the assessee may file objections and if such objections are filed, the Assessing Officer has to dispose of the said objections by a speaking order. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not filed any objection. In our considered view, it would have been proper if the petitioner had filed the objections before the Assessing Officer to the reopening of the assessment for the assessment year 2003-2004 before approaching this court. 4. We, accordingly, dispose of the writ petition by the

following order:- (i) The petitioner shall be at liberty to file objections to the reopening of the assessment for the assessment year 2003-2004 pursuant to the notice issued to him under section 148 of the Income Tax Act and the reasons supplied by the Assessing Officer. (ii) If such objections are filed within three weeks from today, the Assessing Officer shall dispose

3 of the objections by passing a speaking order. (iii) For a period of four weeks from the date of communication of the order disposing of the petitioner's objections, the Assessing Officer shall not proceed with the assessment for the assessment year 2003-2004. (R.M.LODHA, J.)

(J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →