DEVASHREE ISPAT PRIVATE LIMITED vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

PDF · subscribers
WPO/2066/2022HC CalcuttaWBCHCO002982202227 April 2022Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE MD. NIZAMUDDIN3 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, in its appellate jurisdiction, found merit in the appellants' contention that the writ petitions would become infructuous if the re-assessment proceedings were allowed to proceed without the department filing its affidavits-in-opposition. The Court noted the department's admitted non-compliance with the Single Bench's direction to file affidavits within four weeks from November 22, 2022. Consequently, the Court inclined to grant the interim relief sought by the appellants. The order passed by the assessing officer under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated July 29, 2022 (for VRV Trading Co Private Limited) and July 28, 2022 (for Koel Overseas LLP), along with the consequential notices issued under Section 148 of the Act dated July 29, 2022, and July 28, 2022, respectively, were stayed. The time for filing affidavits-in-opposition was extended by four weeks, with a further two weeks for any reply, and the writ petitions were to be listed before the Learned Single Bench after six weeks.

What were the facts?

These are intra-court appeals filed by VRV Trading Co Private Limited and Koel Overseas LLP (the appellants/writ petitioners) against an order dated November 22, 2022, passed by a learned Single Bench of the Calcutta High Court. The Single Bench had declined to grant any interim order in the writ petitions filed by the appellants, directing the department (respondents) to file affidavits-in-opposition within four weeks. The appeals highlight that the department had not filed their affidavits-in-opposition as directed. The appellants contended that if re-assessment proceedings were allowed to proceed, the writ petitions would become infructuous, especially given the department's non-compliance with the filing direction.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court erred in declining to grant an interim order in the writ petitions, thereby allowing re-assessment proceedings to continue without the department filing its response. Assessee's Contention: The appellants argued that the failure of the department to file affidavits-in-opposition within the stipulated time, coupled with the continuation of re-assessment proceedings, would render the writ petitions infructuous. They relied on the principle that a party should not suffer due to the non-compliance of directions by the opposing party. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue at this stage of the proceedings concerning the interim order. The focus was on the department's non-compliance with the Single Bench's directions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Item No.9 & 10. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE HEARD ON: 20.01.2023 DELIVERED ON: 20.01.2023 CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA M.A.T. No.2065 of 2022 with I.A. No.CAN 1 of 2023

VRV Trading Co Private Limited. Vs. Union of India & Ors. With M.A.T. No.2066 of 2022 with I.A. No.CAN 1 of 2023

Koel Overseas LLP. Vs. Union of India & Ors. Appearance:- Mr. Sutirtha Das, Mr. Soham Sanyal … for the appellant. (in both appeals)

Mr. Tilak Mitra

… for the respondents. JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.) 1. These intra-Court appeals have been filed by the writ petitioners against the order dated 22nd November, 2022 in W.P.A. No.23437 of 2022/ W.P.A. No.23438 of 2022 in and by which the learned Single Bench had declined to grant any interim order while entertaining the writ petitions and directing affidavits- in-opposition to be filed by the department within four weeks from 22nd November, 2022. Admittedly, till date, the department has not filed their affidavits-in-opposition. Therefore, if the re-assessment proceedings are allowed to proceed further, then the writ petitions would become infructuous, more so when the department has not complied with the direction issued by the learned Single Bench to file their affidavits-in-opposition within four weeks from 22nd November, 2022. 2. Therefore, we are inclined to grant an interim order sought for by the appellants. Accordingly, the order passed by the assessing officer under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”) dated 29th July, 2022 / 28th July, 2

2022 and the consequential notice issued under Section 148 of the Act dated 29th July, 2022 / 28th July, 2022 shall remain stayed till the writ petitions are heard and disposed of. 3. The time granted for filing affidavits-in-opposition is extended by a period of four weeks from date; reply thereto, if any, be filed within a period of two weeks thereafter and the writ petitions be listed after six weeks before the appropriate Learned Single Bench. 4. With the above directions, the appeals are disposed of along with all the connected applications. 5. There shall be no order as to costs. 6. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished to the parties expeditiously upon compliance of all legal formalities.

(T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J) I agree,

(HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.)

NAREN/PALLAB(AR.C) 3

More judgments on Section 148A

All 3,543 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →