SAROJ PODDAR vs. PR CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI NEW DELHI & ANR.

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/15052/2022HC DelhiDLHC01040410202214 August 2024Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court allowed the writ petition. The court held that the issues and challenge raised were concluded by its prior judgment in Twylight Infrastructure (P) Ltd. v. CIT. Consequently, the impugned order dated July 27, 2022, passed under Section 148A(d) and the notice under Section 148 dated July 27, 2022, were quashed. This decision was made subject to the liberty reserved for the revenue as per paragraphs 28 to 30 of the Twylight Infrastructure judgment. These paragraphs state that the revenue has the liberty to take steps, if deemed necessary, as per law, to commence reassessment proceedings afresh. The rights and contentions of both sides remain open in the event the revenue initiates fresh reassessment proceedings. The ratio of the decision is that reassessment proceedings initiated without proper approval under Section 151(ii) are liable to be quashed, but the revenue may be granted liberty to initiate proceedings afresh.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Saroj Poddar, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court challenging an order dated July 27, 2022, passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and a notice under Section 148 dated July 27, 2022. The respondents were the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi, and another authority. The High Court noted that the issues raised in the present petition were concluded by its prior judgment in Twylight Infrastructure (P) Ltd. v. CIT [2024 SCC OnLine Del 330]. The court was therefore asked to decide the validity of the impugned order and notice.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the impugned order dated July 27, 2022, passed under Section 148A(d) and the notice under Section 148 dated July 27, 2022, are liable to be quashed on the grounds considered in the judgment of Twylight Infrastructure (P) Ltd. v. CIT [2024 SCC OnLine Del 330]? (Question of law and mixed fact and law, turning on Section 148A and Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961). Assessee's contentions: The petitioner relied on the judgment in Twylight Infrastructure (P) Ltd. v. CIT, which presumably dealt with similar grounds for challenging reassessment proceedings. Revenue's contentions: The revenue sought liberty to commence reassessment proceedings afresh if the impugned orders and notices were set aside, as per the liberty granted in the Twylight Infrastructure judgment. They also relied on the judgment in Ganesh Dass Khanna.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 148,Section 151

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~31 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 15052/2022

SAROJ PODDAR

.....Petitioner Through: Ms. Prem Lata Bansal Sr. Adv. with Mr. S. Bansal, Advs.

versus PR CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI NEW DELHI & ANR.

.....Respondent Through: Mr. Abhishek Maratha, Sr. SC alongwith Mr. Parth Semiwal, Mr. Apoorv Agarwal, Jr. SCs. with Ms. Nupur Sharma, Mr. Manav Goyal, Mr. Gaurav Singh, Ms. Divya Verma and Mr. Bhanukaran Singh Jodha, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

O R D E R %

14.08.2024 1. On hearing learned counsels for parties, we find that the issues and the challenge raised stands concluded in light of the judgment rendered by the Court in Twylight Infrastructure (P) Ltd. v. CIT [2024 SCC OnLine Del 330]. 2. Accordingly, for the reasons assigned in the aforenoted judgment, we allow the instant writ petition and quash the impugned order dated 27 July 2022 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as well as the notice referable to Section 148 dated 27 July 2022, subject to liberty reserved as per paragraph Nos. 28 to 30 of Twylight Infrastructure, and which read as under: “28. Before us, the counsel for the revenue continue to hold this position. The only liberty that they seek is that if, based on the judgment in Ganesh Dass Khanna, the impugned orders and 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 22/08/2024 at 12:26:55

notices are set aside, liberty be given to the revenue to commence reassessment proceedings afresh. 29. Therefore, having regard to the aforesaid, the impugned notices and orders in each of the above-captioned writ petitions are quashed on the ground that there is no approval of the specified authority, as indicated in Section 151(ii) of the Act. The direction is issued with the caveat that the revenue will have liberty to take steps, if deemed necessary, albeit as per law. 30. Needless to add, the rights and contentions of both the sides will remain open, in the event the revenue triggers reassessment proceedings.” 3. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

YASHWANT VARMA, J.

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J. AUGUST 14, 2024/neha 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 22/08/2024 at 12:26:55

More judgments on Section 148A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →