SAMIR ANDREA KASLIWAL SON OF, LATE SHRI SANJAY KASLIWAL vs. PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
CW/10761/2023HC RajasthanRJHC02055423202311 July 2024Bench: AVNEESH JHINGAN,ASHUTOSH KUMAR5 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the petitions based on the statements made by both parties. The revenue submitted that the matter would now be considered in light of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in G.K.N. Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer & Ors., and that the reasons would be supplied immediately. In view of this statement, the Court directed the respondent to proceed in pursuance to the notice in accordance with the law. The core principle applied is that procedural fairness, including the supply of reasons for reopening an assessment, must be adhered to as per Supreme Court pronouncements. The operative direction is for the respondent to proceed lawfully, implying the supply of reasons and further action as per the Income Tax Act.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Samir Andrea Kasliwal, through his constituted attorney, filed multiple writ petitions challenging notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. These notices were issued to the legal heir of the late Shri Sanjay Kasliwal for the Assessment Year 2012-13. The primary contention of the petitioner was that the reasons for issuing these notices were not supplied, contrary to the Supreme Court's decision in G.K.N. Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer & Ors. The respondents argued that the petitioner had not fulfilled the prerequisite of filing returns, hence the reasons were not provided. However, the petitioner stated that returns have been filed during the pendency of the petitions.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the respondent-revenue was obligated to supply the reasons for issuing a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, to the petitioner, a legal heir, in compliance with the Supreme Court's ruling in G.K.N. Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer & Ors. (Assessee's contention). 2. Whether the non-filing of returns by the petitioner precluded the respondent-revenue from providing the reasons for the Section 148 notice (Revenue's contention). The assessee argued that the Supreme Court's mandate in G.K.N. Driveshafts requires the supply of reasons, irrespective of the stage of compliance with other procedural requirements. The revenue contended that the supply of reasons is contingent upon the assessee fulfilling certain pre-requisites, such as filing the return of income, as per the G.K.N. Driveshafts decision.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[2024:RJ-JP:28996-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10761/2023 Samir Andrea Kasliwal Son Of, Late Shri Sanjay Kasliwal, Aged About 39 Years, Resident Of, B-6(E), Adinath Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur - 302001 Through His Constituted Attorney Mr. Sudhir Kasliwal R/o B-6, Adinath Marg, C- Scheme, Jaipur ----Petitioner Versus 1. Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jaipur - 1, Income-Tax Department, Ncr Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur. 2. Assitant Commisioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1, Jpr, Income Tax Department, Ncr Building, Statute Circle, Jaipur. ----Respondents Connected With D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10769/2023 Samir Andrea Kasliwal Son Of, Late Shri Sanjay Kasliwal, Aged About 39 Years, Resident Of, B-6(E), Adinath Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur - 302001 Through His Constituted Attorney Mr. Sudhir Kasliwal R/o B-6, Adinath Marg, C- Scheme, Jaipur ----Petitioner Versus 1. Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jaipur - 1, Income-Tax Department, Ncr Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur. 2. Assitant Commisioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1, Jpr, Income Tax Department, Ncr Building, Statute Circle, Jaipur. ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10772/2023 Samir Andrea Kasliwal Son Of, Late Shri Sanjay Kasliwal, Aged About 39 Years, Resident Of, B-6(E), Adinath Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur - 302001 Through His Constituted Attorney Mr. Sudhir Kasliwal R/o B-6, Adinath Marg, C- Scheme, Jaipur ----Petitioner Versus

[2024:RJ-JP:28996-DB] (2 of 5) [CW-10761/2023] 1. Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jaipur - 1, Income-Tax Department, Ncr Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur. 2. Assitant Commisioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1, Jpr, Income Tax Department, Ncr Building, Statute Circle, Jaipur. ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10773/2023 Samir Andrea Kasliwal Son Of, Late Shri Sanjay Kasliwal, Aged About 39 Years, Resident Of, B-6(E), Adinath Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur - 302001 Through His Constituted Attorney Mr. Sudhir Kasliwal R/o B-6, Adinath Marg, C- Scheme, Jaipur ----Petitioner Versus 1. Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jaipur - 1, Income-Tax Department, Ncr Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur. 2. Assitant Commisioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1, Jpr, Income Tax Department, Ncr Building, Statute Circle, Jaipur. ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10774/2023 Samir Andrea Kasliwal Son Of, Late Shri Sanjay Kasliwal, Aged About 39 Years, Resident Of, B-6(E), Adinath Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur - 302001 Through His Constituted Attorney Mr. Sudhir Kasliwal R/o B-6, Adinath Marg, C- Scheme, Jaipur ----Petitioner Versus 1. Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jaipur - 1, Income-Tax Department, Ncr Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur. 2. Assitant Commisioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1, Jpr, Income Tax Department, Ncr Building, Statute Circle, Jaipur. ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10776/2023 Samir Andrea Kasliwal Son Of, Late Shri Sanjay Kasliwal, Aged

[2024:RJ-JP:28996-DB] (3 of 5) [CW-10761/2023] About 39 Years, Resident Of, B-6(E), Adinath Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur - 302001 Through His Constituted Attorney Mr. Sudhir Kasliwal R/o B-6, Adinath Marg, C- Scheme, Jaipur ----Petitioner Versus 1. Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jaipur - 1, Income-Tax Department, Ncr Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur. 2. Assitant Commisioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1, Jpr, Income Tax Department, Ncr Building, Statute Circle, Jaipur. ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10777/2023 Samir Andrea Kasliwal Son Of, Late Shri Sanjay Kasliwal, Aged About 39 Years, Resident Of, B-6(E), Adinath Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur - 302001 Through His Constituted Attorney Mr. Sudhir Kasliwal R/o B-6, Adinath Marg, C- Scheme, Jaipur ----Petitioner Versus 1. Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jaipur - 1, Income-Tax Department, Ncr Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur. 2. Assitant Commisioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1, Jpr, Income Tax Department, Ncr Building, Statute Circle, Jaipur. ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10778/2023 Samir Andrea Kasliwal Son Of, Late Shri Sanjay Kasliwal, Aged About 39 Years, Resident Of, B-6(E), Adinath Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur - 302001 Through His Constituted Attorney Mr. Sudhir Kasliwal R/o B-6, Adinath Marg, C- Scheme, Jaipur ----Petitioner Versus 1. Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jaipur - 1, Income-Tax Department, Ncr Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur. 2. Assitant Commisioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1, Jpr,

[2024:RJ-JP:28996-DB] (4 of 5) [CW-10761/2023] Income Tax Department, Ncr Building, Statute Circle, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jaideep Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anuroop Singhi Mr. N.S. Bhati Mr. Aditya Khandelwal HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR Order 11/07/2024 AVNEESH JHINGAN, J (ORAL):- 1. These petitions are being disposed of by this common order as the facts and issues involved are similar. For convenience, the facts are being taken from D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10761/2023. 2. This petition is filed seeking quashing of notice dated 30.03.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act,1961 to Mr. Sanjay Kasliwal through legal heir for the Assessment year 2012-13. 3. The main grievance raised is that the reasons have not been supplied to the petitioner in compliance with the decision of the Supreme Court in G.K.N Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer & Ors. reported in 259 ITR page 19. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner had not complied with the pre-requisites of the decision of G.K. Driveshafts (supra), that is not filing the returns, hence, the reasons are not supplied. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during pendency of the petition, the returns have been filed.

[2024:RJ-JP:28996-DB] (5 of 5) [CW-10761/2023] 6. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the matter shall now be considered in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in G.K. Driveshafts (supra). The reasons will be supplied immediately. 7. In view of the statement made, the petitions are disposed of directing the respondent to proceed in pursuance to the notice in accordance with law. (ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J (AVNEESH JHINGAN),J Simple Kumawat /19-26

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →