HARSIMRAT INVESTMENTS PVT. LIMITED vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 11(1)DELHI & ANR.

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/14752/2024HC DelhiDLHC01072304202417 December 2024Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA,HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court set aside the impugned order dated 30.08.2024 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer (AO) to be considered afresh. This decision was based on the joint submission of the parties that the controversy was identical to a previous case (MPS Exim Private Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 17(1) Delhi & Anr.) which had been disposed of by remanding the matter to the AO. The AO was directed to consider the matter afresh in light of the averments made in the present petition and in light of the orders passed in the case of M/s Dhiru Builders and Promoters Pvt. Ltd. No specific issues were decided on merits, and the petition was disposed of in terms of the remand.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Harsimrat Investments Pvt. Limited, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court challenging a notice dated 08.08.2024 issued under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, an order dated 30.08.2024 passed under Section 148A(d) for Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19, and a consequential notice dated 30.08.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Act. The petitioner sought to quash these notices and orders and sought a prohibition against the respondents from taking any further steps. The parties informed the court that the controversy was identical to a previously disposed of case, MPS Exim Private Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 17(1) Delhi & Anr.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice dated 08.08.2024 issued under Section 148A(b), the order dated 30.08.2024 passed under Section 148A(d), and the consequential notice dated 30.08.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for AY 2018-19 against the petitioner are liable to be quashed and prohibited from being given effect to. The petitioner argued for the quashing of the impugned notices and order, seeking a prohibition against further proceedings. The revenue did not record any specific arguments in the judgment. The parties jointly submitted that the controversy was identical to a previous case and requested a similar order of remand.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~87 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 14752/2024 & CM APPL. 61954/2024

HARSIMRAT INVESTMENTS PVT. LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Ruchesh Sinha and Ms. Monalisa Maity, Advocates

versus

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 11(1) DELHI & ANR .....Respondent Through: Mr. Siddhartha Sinha, SSC, Ms. Anuja Pethia, JSC, Ms. Anu Priya Nisha Minz and Mr. Srikant Singh, Advocates

CORAM:

HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA

O R D E R %

17.12.2024 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition inter alia praying as under:- “a) That this Hon’ble High Court be pleased to quash the impugned notice dated 08.08.2024 issued U/s 148A(b), the order dated 30.08.2024 passed U/s 148A(d) for the A.Y. 2018- 19 and the consequential notice dated 30.08.2024 issued U/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the Petitioner for the A.Y. 2018-19;

b) That this Hon’ble High Court be pleased to pass a writ of and/or order and/or direction in the nature of prohibition commanding Respondents to forebear from giving effect to and/or taking any step whatsoever pursuant to and/or in This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/12/2024 at 11:59:42

furtherance of the said purported notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act 1961 and/or in any proceedings initiated thereunder for the A.Y 2018-19;”

2.

Learned counsel for the parties state that the controversy involved in the present petition is identical to the one involved in W.P.(C) 13528/2024 captioned MPS Exim Private Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 17(1) Delhi & Anr., which has been disposed of by a separate order remanding the matter to the AO for considering afresh. The learned counsel for the parties submit that a similar order be passed in this petition as well. They submit that the order dated 30.08.2024 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter the Act) in respect of assessment year (AY) 2018- 19 be set aside and the matter be remanded to the Assessing Officer (AO) to consider afresh. 3. In view of the above, the impugned order dated 30.08.2024 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act, is set aside and the matter is remanded to the AO to be considered afresh, in the light of the averments made in the present petition as well as in the light of the orders passed in the case of M/s Dhiru Builders and Promoters Pvt. Ltd. 4. The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Pending application is also disposed of.

VIBHU BAKHRU, ACJ

TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J DECEMBER 17, 2024 Aj

Click here to check corrigendum, if any This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/12/2024 at 11:59:42

More judgments on Section 148A

All 3,543 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →