PITAMBAR SOLVEX PRIVATE LIMITED vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
CW/10153/2021HC RajasthanRJHC02055399202121 July 2022Bench: MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA,SHUBHA MEHTA3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, disposed of the writ petition in terms of the Supreme Court's order dated 04.05.2022 in Union of India & Others Vs. Ashish Agarwal. The Supreme Court had directed that notices issued under the unamended Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which were subject to writ petitions before various High Courts, shall be deemed to have been issued under Section 148A of the Act and construed as show-cause notices. The Assessing Officer was directed to provide information and material relied upon within thirty days, allowing assessees two weeks to reply. The requirement of conducting an enquiry under Section 148A(a) was dispensed with as a one-time measure. The Assessing Officers were to thereafter pass orders under Section 148A(d) and, if necessary, issue a notice under the substituted Section 148. All defences and contentions available to the assessees and the Revenue were preserved. The Supreme Court's order was made applicable PAN India and modified judgments and orders of various High Courts accordingly. The High Court directed the concerned authorities to proceed in accordance with these Supreme Court directions.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Pitambar Solvex Private Limited, filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, challenging an action by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 6, Jaipur. The parties jointly submitted that the issue in the petition was covered by the Supreme Court's order dated 04.05.2022 in the case of Union of India & Others Vs. Ashish Agarwal. The Supreme Court's order dealt with notices issued under the unamended Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which were subject to writ petitions before various High Courts. The High Court, in its order, stated that the writ petition was disposed of in terms of the Supreme Court's directions.

What were the issues?

1. Whether notices issued under the unamended Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which were subject to challenge before various High Courts, should be deemed to have been issued under Section 148A of the Act as substituted by the Finance Act, 2021, and treated as show-cause notices under Section 148A(b)? - Assessee: Not recorded. - Revenue: Not recorded. 2. Whether the requirement of conducting any enquiry with the prior approval of the specified authority under Section 148A(a) is mandatory for notices issued under the unamended Section 148 from 01.04.2021 till date? - Assessee: Not recorded. - Revenue: Not recorded. 3. Whether the Assessing Officer should thereafter pass orders in terms of Section 148A(d) and, following the procedure under Section 148A, issue a notice under the substituted Section 148? - Assessee: Not recorded. - Revenue: Not recorded. 4. Whether all defences available to the assessees, including those under Section 149 of the IT Act, and all rights and contentions available to the assessees and Revenue under the Finance Act, 2021, and in law, shall continue to be available? - Assessee: Not recorded. - Revenue: Not recorded.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 148A,Section 149

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10153/2021 Pitambar Solvex Private Limited, S-103 Sumer Complex, Gautam Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur 302001, (Rajasthan) India, Through Its Director, Mrs. Manju Sharma W/o Shri Rajesh Sharma, Aged 49, R/o 24, Guru Jambeshwar Nagar-B, Gandhi Path, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur ----Petitioner Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 6, Ncrb, Income Tax Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur 302001 ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahendra Gargieya with Mr. Arunabh Dey & Mr. Devang Gargieya For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Malani for Mr. Nikhil Simlote HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHUBHA MEHTA Order 21/07/2022 When this case came up for hearing today, learned counsel for the parties jointly submitted that the issue raised in this petition would be covered by order dated 04.05.2022 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India & Others Vs. Ashish Agarwal (Civil Appeal No. 3005/2022 and batch of appeals). Following directions have been issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid case: “10. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, the present Appeals are ALLOWED IN PART. The impugned common judgments and orders passed by the High Court of Judicature at

(2 of 3) [CW-10153/2021] Allahabad in W.T. No. 524/2021 and other allied tax appeals/petitions, is/are hereby modified and substituted as under:- (i) The impugned section 148 notices issued to the respective assessees which were issued under unamended section 148 of the IT Act, which were the subject matter of writ petitions before the various respective High Courts shall be deemed to have been issued under section 148A of the IT Act as substituted by the Finance Act, 2021 and construed or treated to be show-cause notices in terms of section 148A(b). The assessing officer shall, within thirty days from today provide to the respective assessees information and material relied upon by the Revenue, so that the assessees can reply to the show-cause notices within two weeks thereafter; (ii) The requirement of conducting any enquiry, if required, with the prior approval of specified authority under section 148A(a) is hereby dispensed with as a one-time measure vis-à-vis those notices which have been issued under section 148 of the unamended Act from 01.04.2021 till date, including those which have been quashed by the High Courts. Even otherwise as observed hereinabove holding any enquiry with the prior approval of specified authority is not mandatory but it is for the concerned Assessing Officer to hold any enquiry, if required; (iii) The assessing officers shall thereafter pass orders in terms of section 148A(d) in respect of each of the concerned assessees; Thereafter after following the procedure as required under section 148A may issue notice under section 148 (as substituted); (iv) All defences which may be available to the assessees including those available under section 149 of the IT Act and all rights and contentions which may be available to the concerned assessees and Revenue under the Finance Act, 2021 and in law shall continue to be available. 11. The present order shall be applicable PAN INDIA and all judgments and orders passed by different High Courts on the issue and under which similar notices which were issued after 01.04.2021 issued under section 148 of the Act are set aside and shall be governed by the present order and shall stand modified to the aforesaid extent. The

(3 of 3) [CW-10153/2021] present order is passed in exercise of powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India so as to avoid any further appeals by the Revenue on the very issue by challenging similar judgments and orders, with a view not to burden this Court with approximately 9000 appeals. We also observe that present order shall also govern the pending writ petitions, pending before various High Courts in which similar notices under Section 148 of the Act issued after 01.04.2021 are under challenge. 12. The impugned common judgments and orders passed by the High Court of Allahabad and the similar judgments and orders passed by various High Courts, more particularly, the respective judgments and orders passed by the various High Courts particulars of which are mentioned hereinabove, shall stand modified/substituted to the aforesaid extent only. All these appeals are accordingly partly allowed to the aforesaid extent. In the facts of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.” Accordingly, this writ petition is also finally disposed off in terms of order dated 04.05.2022 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India & Others Vs. Ashish Agarwal (supra), as stated above. The authorities concerned shall proceed to decide the matter in accordance with the directions issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in para 10 of the aforesaid order. (SHUBHA MEHTA),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),J Anu /16

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →