M/S KALINDEE ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

CW/2846/2021HC RajasthanRJHC02015526202116 April 2021Bench: SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA2 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of all the writ petitions in terms of the reply filed by the Revenue Department. The Court noted the revenue's submission that a revised circular dated 23.03.2021 had been issued by the CBDT. Based on this, the revenue conceded that the petitioners' cases do not fall under the category of search cases. Consequently, the demand for 125% of the tax was incorrect, and the petitioners are liable to deposit only 100% of the tax. The Department was directed to issue a fresh demand as per Form-3, as required under the aforesaid circular, within a period of seven days. The ratio of this decision is that where a revised circular clarifies the tax deposit requirements and the revenue concedes to its applicability, the demand should be adjusted accordingly, and the assessee should not be subjected to a higher demand than what the revised circular permits.

What were the facts?

The petitioners, M/s Aviram Enterprises Private Limited, Meghraj Singh Shekhawat, and M/s Kalindee Estates Private Limited, filed writ petitions before the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur. The petitions challenged the demand for 125% of the tax by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur-I. The revenue, through its learned counsel, submitted that a revised circular had been issued by the CBDT. Based on this revised circular, the revenue took the stand that the petitioners' cases do not fall under the category of search cases. Consequently, they are required to deposit 100% of the tax, not the previously demanded 125%. The petitioners' counsel did not object to this proposal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioners' cases fall under the category of search cases for the purpose of tax deposit, as per the prevailing circulars and provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961? (Question of law and fact) Contentions: Assessee: The petitioners are not objecting to the proposal made by the revenue based on the revised CBDT circular. Revenue: A revised circular has been issued by the CBDT. In view of this revised circular, the Department's stand is that the petitioners' cases do not fall in the category of search cases. Therefore, they are required to deposit 100% of the tax, not 125% as demanded earlier. The revenue relies on the CBDT circular dated 23.03.2021.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2845/2021 M/s Aviram Enterprises Private Limited, Having Its Registered Office At - 603, Vidhyut Nagar - A, Ajmer Road, Jaipur - 302019, Through Its Director Sh. Avinash Vyas. ----Petitioner Versus Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jaipur - I, New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur. ----Respondent Connected with S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3109/2021 Meghraj Singh Shekhawat S/o Late Sh. Kalyan Singh, Aged About 63 Years, R/o C-28, Hanuman Nagar, Khatipura, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jaipur -I, New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur. ----Respondent S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2846/2021 M/s Kalindee Estates Private Limited, Having Its Office At C-4, Silver Oak, Sawai Jai Singh Highway, Bani Park, Jaipur Through Its Director Smt. Kalpana Gemini. ----Petitioner Versus Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jaipur-I, New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Javed Khan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anuroop Singhi HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA Order

(2 of 2) [CW-2845/2021] 16/04/2021 Learned counsel appearing for revenue submits that the revised circular has been issued by the CBDT and in view thereof, a stand has been taken by the Department that all the present petitioners’ cases do not fall in the category of search cases and therefore they are required to deposit 100% of the tax and not the 125% as demanded earlier. Accordingly, he prays that the writ petition be disposed of, keeping in view the new circular issued by the CBDT dated 23.03.2021. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner does not object to such proposal. Accordingly, all these petitions are disposed of in terms of the reply filed by the Revenue Department and as noticed above. The Department shall not be treated as search case and shall now issue a fresh demand as per Form-3 as required under the aforesaid circular within a period of seven days. Accordingly, all the writ petitions stand disposed of. (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J NITIN /100,119-120

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →