ISHMEET KAUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER AND ANOTHER

PDF · subscribers
CWP/29018/2024HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01144154202429 October 2024Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that no cause of action arises for the petitioner to file a writ petition for Assessment Years 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19, 2020-21, and 2021-22, based on the Assessing Officer's prima facie observation that there was no incriminating evidence. The Court found no reason to interfere at this stage. Regarding Assessment Year 2019-20, the Court noted that the notice under Section 142(1) does not, in any manner, reflect proceedings under Section 153C. However, the Court stated that the petitioner is always free to file a reply to the said notice and can take up objections before the concerned authority, including filing an appeal as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The writ petition was dismissed accordingly. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided, but the reasoning implies that the petitioner's recourse is through the statutory appeal process rather than a writ petition at this juncture.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Ishmeet Kaur, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana challenging notices issued by the Assessing Officer (AO). The notices pertained to Assessment Years (AY) 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19, 2019-20, 2020-21, and 2021-22. The petitioner argued that the AO's observation indicated no incriminating evidence was found for AYs 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19, 2020-21, and 2021-22. For AY 2019-20, the petitioner contended that the notice under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, did not reflect proceedings under Section 153C of the Act. The Revenue was represented by the Income Tax Officer and another.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner has a cause of action to file a writ petition for Assessment Years 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19, 2020-21, and 2021-22, given the Assessing Officer's prima facie observation of no incriminating evidence. 2. Whether the notice issued under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2019-20, which does not reflect proceedings under Section 153C of the Act, is valid. Assessee's Contentions: - For AYs 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19, 2020-21, and 2021-22, the AO's own observation suggests no incriminating material, thus no cause of action arises for a petition. - For AY 2019-20, the Section 142(1) notice does not refer to Section 153C proceedings. Revenue's Contentions: - The judgment records no specific arguments from the Revenue regarding the validity of the notices or the existence of a cause of action.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 142(1),Section 153C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

CWP-29018-202 111 IN TH ISHMEET KA INCOME TA

CORAM: H

H Present: M

SANJEEV P

1.

Prima f (for sho the dep 2019-2 arising 2. So far a 1961 to the sam 153C o to the s 24 (O&M) Page 1 of 2 HE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA CHANDIGAR

AUR Vs.

AX OFFICER AND ANOTHER **** HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SAN HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SAN **** Mr. Nikhil Goyal, Advocate for t Mr. Yogesh Putney, Sr. Standing for the respondents/Revenue. **** RAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) facie keeping in view the observ ort ‘AO’) that there is no incrim partment for Assessment Year 0, 2020-21 and 2021-22, we d in favour of the petitioner to file as the notice issued under section o the petitioner for the Assessm me does not in any manner ref of the Act to be recorded. The p aid notice. AB AND HARYANA AT RH CWP-29018-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 29.10.2024 . . . . Petitioner . . . . Respondents NJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA NJAY VASHISTH the petitioner. g Counsel ) vations of the Assessing Officer minating evidence available with ar 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19, do not find any cause of action e any petition. n 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, ment Year 2019-20 is concerned, flect proceedings under section etitioner can always file a reply

) 4 r s r h , n , , n y MOHIT GOYAL 2024.10.29 13:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-29018-202 3. No case stage. 4. Writ Pe 5. The pe concern Income

October 29, 20 Mohit goyal 1. Whethe 2. Whethe 24 (O&M) Page 2 of 2 e is made out for interference as etition stands dismissed accordin etitioner is always free to take ned authority and even file an ap e Tax Act, 1961.

(SANJ 024 r speaking/reasoned?

Y r reportable?

Y s no cause of action arises at this ngly. e up his objections before the ppeal as per the provisions of the JEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No

s e e MOHIT GOYAL 2024.10.29 13:12 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 →