ANVIL CABLES PRIVATE LIMITED vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE DELHI (EARLIER NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI) AND ORS.

PDF · subscribers
WPO/1019/2022HC CalcuttaWBCHCO001361202201 March 2022Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE MD. NIZAMUDDIN3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that rushing to the Writ Court without allowing the respondent assessing officer to consider and dispose of the petitioner's objection against the Section 148 notice is not proper. Therefore, the Court was not inclined to entertain the writ petition on this ground. The Court directed the respondent assessing officer to consider and dispose of the petitioner's objection in accordance with law, by passing a reasoned and speaking order, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or its authorized representative, within eight weeks from the date of communication of the order. The writ petition was disposed of with these observations and directions.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Anvil Cables Private Limited, challenged a notice dated March 29, 2021, issued under Section 148 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner had filed an objection against this notice before the assessing officer. The High Court observed that it was not appropriate to approach the Writ Court without allowing the assessing officer to consider and dispose of the pending objection. The Court noted that the objection was still pending.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Writ Court should entertain a writ petition challenging a notice under Section 148 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961, when an objection against the said notice is pending before the assessing officer? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner approached the High Court by way of a writ petition to challenge the Section 148 notice. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, represented by the National Faceless Assessment Centre Delhi and others, was present before the Court. The Court's observation implies that the revenue would likely argue that the statutory remedy of filing an objection should be exhausted first.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

OD 22 ORDER SHEET WPO 1019 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE ANVIL CABLES PRIVATE LIMITED Vs NATIONAL FACELSSS ASSESSMENT CENTRE DELHI (EARLIER NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI) & ORS. BEFORE: The Hon’ble JUSTICE MD. NIZAMUDDIN Date : 1st March, 2022 (Via Video Conference) Mr. Abhratosh Majumder, Sr.Adv. Ms. Swapna Das, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Das, Adv. …for the petitioner Mr. Smarajit Roy Chowdhury, Mr. Madhu Jana, Advs. …for the respondents The Court: Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties. In this matter petitioner has challenged the impugned notice dated 29th March, 2021 under Section 148 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 and it appears from record that against the said impugned notice petitioner has filed objection against the same which is still pending before the assessing officer concerned and in my view without allowing the respondent assessing officer to consider and dispose of the same, rushing to the Writ Court is not proper and I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition on this ground. However, the respondent assessing officer concerned is directed to consider and dispose of the aforesaid objection in accordance with

2 law and by passing a reasoned and speaking order and after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or its authorised representative within eight weeks from the date of communication of this order. With these observations and directions, this writ petition being WPO 1019 of 2022 is disposed of. (MD. NIZAMUDDIN, J.) TR/

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →