CSS SECURITY SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC & ANR.

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/10579/2024HC DelhiDLHC01045826202401 August 2024Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court held that the writ petitions were not maintainable. The Court reasoned that the grievance of the petitioner, concerning the purported failure to duly serve the assessment intimation orders, did not constitute a justifiable ground to entertain the writ petitions. This conclusion was based on the Supreme Court's judgment in Checkmate Services Pvt Ltd vs Commissioner of Income Tax (1) [(2022) SCC Online SC 1423]. The Supreme Court had already addressed and answered the issue on facts as well as on law against the assessee in similar circumstances. Consequently, the High Court found no basis to interfere with the demands raised through the Section 143(1) intimations. The operative direction was to dismiss the writ petitions.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, CSS Security Systems Private Limited, filed multiple writ petitions before the Delhi High Court challenging demands raised against it. These demands stemmed from assessment intimations issued under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Years 2019-2020, 2018-2019, 2017-2018, 2021-2022, and 2020-2021. The primary grievance articulated by the petitioner was the alleged failure of the respondents (Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax CPC and another) to duly serve these intimation orders. The petitions were filed in 2024, and interim stay applications were also presented.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the purported failure to duly serve assessment intimation orders under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, constitutes a justifiable ground to entertain writ petitions challenging the resultant demands, particularly when the issue on facts and law has been decided against the assessee? The Assessee (Petitioner) contended that the non-service of the intimation orders was a fundamental procedural flaw that vitiated the demands raised. They argued that without proper service, they were unaware of the demands and thus could not have taken timely action. The Revenue (Respondents) argued that the issue of service and the validity of demands arising from Section 143(1) intimations, even if service is disputed, has been authoritatively settled by the Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt Ltd vs Commissioner of Income Tax. They asserted that the petitioner's grievance was therefore not maintainable in writ jurisdiction.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (3 matters)

W.P.(C) 10577/2024
W.P.(C) 10578/2024
W.P.(C) 10579/2024

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

$~81 to 84 & 86 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 10577/2024 & CM APPL. 43520/2024 (Stay) CSS SECURITY SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Dr. Amit George, Mr. Manish Gandhi, Mr. Dhiraj Abraham Philip, Mr. Febin M. Varghese & Ms. Rupam Jha, Advs. versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC & ANR.

.....Respondents Through: Mr. Indruj Singh Rai, SSC with Mr. Sanjeev Menon, Mr. Rahul Singh, JSCs & Mr. Anmol Jagga, Advs. 82 + W.P.(C) 10578/2024 & CM APPL. 43523/2024 (Stay) CSS SECURITY SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Dr. Amit George, Mr. Manish Gandhi, Mr. Dhiraj Abraham Philip, Mr. Febin M. Varghese & Ms. Rupam Jha, Advs. versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC & ANR.

.....Respondents Through: Mr. Indruj Singh Rai, SSC with Mr. Sanjeev Menon, Mr. Rahul Singh, JSCs & Mr. Anmol Jagga, Advs. 83 + W.P.(C) 10579/2024 & CM APPL. 43524/2024 (Stay) CSS SECURITY SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Dr. Amit George, Mr. Manish Gandhi, Mr. Dhiraj Abraham Philip, Mr. Febin M. Varghese & Ms. Rupam Jha, Advs. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 03/07/2025 at 07:43:33

versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC & ANR.

.....Respondents Through: Mr. Indruj Singh Rai, SSC with Mr. Sanjeev Menon, Mr. Rahul Singh, JSCs & Mr. Anmol Jagga, Advs. 84 + W.P.(C) 10580/2024 & CM APPL. 43526/2024 (Stay) CSS SECURITY SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Dr. Amit George, Mr. Manish Gandhi, Mr. Dhiraj Abraham Philip, Mr. Febin M. Varghese & Ms. Rupam Jha, Advs. versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC & ANR.

.....Respondents Through: Mr. Indruj Singh Rai, SSC with Mr. Sanjeev Menon, Mr. Rahul Singh, JSCs & Mr. Anmol Jagga, Advs. 86 + W.P.(C) 10620/2024 & CM APPL. 43655/2024 (Stay) CSS SECURITY SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Dr. Amit George, Mr. Manish Gandhi, Mr. Dhiraj Abraham Philip, Mr. Febin M. Varghese & Ms. Rupam Jha, Advs. versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC & ANR.

.....Respondents Through: Mr. Indruj Singh Rai, SSC with Mr. Sanjeev Menon, Mr. Rahul Singh, JSCs & Mr. Anmol Jagga, Advs. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 03/07/2025 at 07:43:33

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA O R D E R %

01.08.2024 1. These writ petitions impugn demands which stand raised and pertain to Assessment Years’ [“AY”] 2019-2020, 2018-2019, 2017- 2018, 2021-2022 & 2020-2021. These demands emanate from assessment intimations under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 pertaining to the years in question. 2. The grievance of the writ petitioner appears to be a purported failure on the part of the respondents to have duly served the intimation orders. 3. However and in our considered opinion, the same would not constitute a justifiable ground to entertain the writ petitions since undisputedly the issue on facts as well as on law stands answered against the petitioner/assessee in light of the judgment rendered in Checkmate Services Pvt Ltd vs Commissioner of Income Tax (1) [(2022) SCC Online SC 1423]. 4. In view of the aforesaid, the writ petitions shall stand dismissed. YASHWANT VARMA, J. RAVINDER DUDEJA, J. AUGUST 1, 2024/sk This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 03/07/2025 at 07:43:33

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →