VIJAY JAISWAL vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

PDF · subscribers
WPO/2555/2022HC CalcuttaWBCHCO004907202215 September 2022Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE MD. NIZAMUDDIN2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was neither in violation of the principle of natural justice nor contrary to any statutory provision. It also found no procedural irregularity or lack of jurisdiction. The Court reasoned that if the petitioner is dissatisfied with the reasoning in the order passed under Section 148A(d) after due notice and opportunity of hearing, he can raise these grievances in subsequent proceedings under Section 148 of the Act. The Court referred to the Supreme Court's order in Anshul Jain vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. dated September 2, 2022. Furthermore, the Court noted that an order under Section 148A(d) is not an assessment or a demand, and the petitioner still has ample opportunity to argue for the dropping of proceedings under Section 147 in the subsequent stages. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Vijay Jaiswal, filed a writ petition before the High Court at Calcutta challenging an order dated March 29, 2022, passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. This order pertains to the assessment year 2018-19. The petitioner contended that the order was flawed. The respondents were the Union of India and others. The High Court heard arguments from both sides.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is in violation of the principles of natural justice, contrary to statutory provisions, suffers from procedural irregularity, or is without jurisdiction. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner challenged the impugned order under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, implying grievances on merit and procedure. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through its counsel, defended the impugned order and the subsequent proceedings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 148A(d),Section 148,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

OD –2 ORDER SHEET WPO/2555/2022 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE VIJAY JAISWAL VS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE MD. NIZAMUDDIN Date: 15th September, 2022.

Appearance: Mr. Rites Goel, Adv. …For the Petitioner Mrs. Smita Das De, Adv. …For the Respondents The Court: Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. By this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 29th March, 2022 under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 relating to assessment year 2018-19 being annexure P-4 to the writ petition. I have perused the aforesaid impugned order and find the same neither in violation of principle of natural justice nor contrary to any statutory provision nor there is any procedural irregularity nor without jurisdiction. I am of the view that once an order has been passed after observing formalities required under the law in issuing notice under Section 148A(b), giving opportunity of hearing to file an objection to the same and after that if the order has been passed by the assessing officer under Section 148A(d) of the Act and if the assessee petitioner is not satisfied with the reasoning given in such order and has any grievance on merit of the same, he may agitate the same in course of subsequent proceedings after notice under Section 148 of the Act as per view taken by the Hon’ble Supreme

2 Court in its order dated 2nd September, 2022 in the case of Anshul Jain vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 14823/2022. Furthermore an order under Section 148 (d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, itself is neither an assessment nor a demand and petitioner still will have ample scope and opportunity to make out a case if any for dropping of the proceeding under Section 147 of the Act in subsequent proceeding after the order passed under Section 148 (d) of the Act. In view of reasoning and discussion made above this Writ Petition being WPO No. 2555 of 2022 is dismissed.

(MD. NIZAMUDDIN, J.) TR/

More judgments on Section 148A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →