RITU VERMA vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

PDF · subscribers
CWP/19761/2023HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01113950202315 September 2023Bench: MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI,MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the writ petition. It held that the notice dated March 25, 2022, the order dated March 31, 2022, and the notice dated April 2, 2022, were set aside due to the non-compliance with the mandatory minimum seven-day period stipulated in Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Court directed the respondents to pass a fresh order in accordance with the provisions of Section 148A(b). The ratio decidendi is that a procedural requirement of providing a minimum statutory notice period must be strictly adhered to, and failure to do so renders subsequent actions invalid. The operative direction was to set aside the impugned notices and order and to pass a fresh order.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Ritu Verma, filed a writ petition challenging a notice dated March 25, 2022, issued under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, an order dated March 31, 2022, and a notice dated April 2, 2022, issued under Section 148 of the Act. The petitioner contended that the show cause notice under Section 148A(b) was issued on March 25, 2022, requiring a response by March 30, 2022, which provided only 5 days instead of the mandated minimum of seven days. The respondent-department did not dispute this fact.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice dated March 25, 2022, issued under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is liable to be quashed for non-compliance with the mandatory seven-day period for filing a reply. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that Section 148A(b) mandates a minimum of seven days' notice to the assessee to enable them to file a reply. In this case, only five days were provided, violating the statutory requirement. Revenue's Contention: The respondent-department did not dispute the fact that only five days were provided, implicitly acknowledging the procedural lapse.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A(b),Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

CWP-19761-2023

2023:PHHC:122559-DB

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP-19761-2023 Date of decision:- 15.09.2023

Ritu Verma

.... Petitioner vs.

Union of India and ors.

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

Present: Ms. Priyanka Rathi, Advocate,

Ms. Ashwinichandrasekaran, Advocate and

Mr. Umang Goyal, Advocate

for the petitioner *** Ritu Bahri, J.

This petition has been filed for quashing of notice dated 25.03.2022 (P-10) issued under Section 148 A (b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; order dated 31.03.2022( P-25) and notice dated 02.04.02022 (P-16)issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Issue notice of motion.

On asking of the Court, Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Sr. Panel counsel, accepts notice on behalf of respondent-department.

Learned counsel contends that Section 148A 9b) of the Act mandates service of show cause notice being not less than seven days to the assesseee so as to enable the assessee to file its reply and thereafter, passing of order under Section 148A(b) of the Act, 1961. However, in the present case, the petitioner was not given a clear seven days to submits its reply. The show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 25.03.2022 and the petitioner was directed to submit its response Gaurav Arora 2023.09.19 12:45 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/document P&H HC, Chandigarh

CWP-19761-2023

2023:PHHC:122559-DB

on or before 30.03.2022, which is just 5 days as against the mandate of 07 days by the provisions of Section 148A of the Act.

This fact is not being disputed by learned counsel for the respondent.

In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed and notice dated 25.03.2022 (P-10), order dated 31.03.2022( P-15) and notice dated 02.04.02022 (P-16) is set aside. The respondents shall pass fresh order in accordance with Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

(RITU BAHRI)

JUDGE

(MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE 15.09.2023 G Arora

Whether speaking/reasoned

: Yes/No

Whether reportable

: Yes/No Gaurav Arora 2023.09.19 12:45 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/document P&H HC, Chandigarh

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 →