PRIYANKA SARASWAT DEV ALIAS RAKSHA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR.

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/11627/2023HC DelhiDLHC01034518202330 October 2023Author: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA4 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition by applying the directions issued in the case of the petitioner's husband, Ulhas Prabhakar Khaire, mutatis mutandis. This means that the petitioner was granted liberty to re-file/file appeals before the Appellate Authorities along with applications for condonation of delay and stay. These applications are to be considered by the Appellate Authorities in accordance with law and in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. Furthermore, the petitioner is permitted to replicate electronic documents on a hard disk under the supervision of an officer appointed by the revenue, and hard copies of documents will be furnished by the revenue at its own cost. The court acknowledged the principle that access to justice, including the right to recourse to a remedy provided by law, is embedded in Article 21 of the Constitution, especially given the petitioner's and her spouse's prolonged custody and alleged financial constraints. The operative direction is the disposal of the writ petition in terms of the directions issued in the husband's case.

What were the facts?

This writ petition, filed by Priyanka Saraswat Dev, concerns assessment orders passed under Section 144 read with Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Years 2005-06 to 2011-12. The petitioner sought directions for her appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to be taken on record for adjudication on merits without mandatory pre-deposit, and for a stay on the impugned orders. She also sought soft copies of seized documents and electronic data without payment. The petition is linked to a similar petition filed by her husband, Ulhas Prabhakar Khaire, where directions were issued regarding access to documents and legal assistance due to their prolonged custody and alleged lack of funds to contest the substantial demand of Rs. 436 crores. The revenue accepted that the directions issued in the husband's case could be applied mutatis mutandis to the petitioner's case.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to directions for her appeal to be taken on record for adjudication on merits without mandatory pre-deposit and for a stay on the impugned assessment orders, considering the alleged lack of adequate opportunity and the ex-parte nature of the assessment orders. (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning principles of natural justice and procedural fairness under the Income Tax Act, 1961). 2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to soft copies of seized documents and electronic data without payment of any fees, in light of the directions granted to her husband. (Question of law and fact, concerning access to justice and the principles of equity). Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner relies on the order passed in her husband's case (W.P.(C) 4649/2022) which granted liberty to re-file appeals with applications for condonation of delay and stay, and directed that these applications be considered in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances. She also seeks directions for soft copies of seized documents and electronic data, mirroring the relief granted to her husband. Revenue's Contentions: The revenue, through its senior standing counsel, agreed that the directions issued in the husband's case could be applied mutatis mutandis to the petitioner's case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 153A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (3 matters)

W.P.(C) 11627/20
W.P.(C) 11627/2023
W.P.(C) 4649/2022

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

Page 1 of 4

$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI %

Decision delivered on: 30.10.2023 + W.P.(C) 11627/2023 & CM APPL. 45333/2023

PRIYANKA SARASWAT DEV ALIAS RAKSHA ..... Petitioner

Through: Ms Kavita Jha, Adv.

versus

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr Ruchir Bhatia, Sr Standing Counsel with Ms Deeksha Gupta, Adv.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J. (ORAL):

1.

This writ petition came up for hearing before the court on 01.09.2023. After hearing the counsel for the parties, we had broadly articulated the grievances of the petitioner and the relief that she sought, having regard to the order passed on 22.09.2023 by the coordinate bench in the writ petition preferred by her husband, i.e., W.P.(C) 4649/2022 2. For the sake of convenience, the relevant parts of the order dated 01.09.2023 are extracted hereafter: - “2. Ms Kavita Jha, who appears on behalf of the petitioner, says that in support of the petitioner‟s case, she relies upon the order dated 23.03.2022 passed by a coordinate bench of this court in

Page 2 of 4

W.P.(C) 4649/2022, titled Ulhas Prabhakar Khaire alias Sh. Lokeshwar Dev vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. 3. We are told that the aforesaid case concerns the husband of the petitioner. 4. The order passed by the coordinate Bench reads as follows: “Present writ petition has been filed challenging the assessment orders dated 06th March, 2013 passed by the Respondents under Section 144 read with Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the „Act‟) for the Assessment Years 2005-06 to 2011-12 and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom. In the alternative, the Petitioner seeks directions remanding the appeal preferred by the Petitioner before Respondent No.2 to be taken on record for adjudication on merits without mandatory pre- deposit and for staying the operation of the impugned orders till the disposal of appeal by Respondent No.2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that an unreasonably high demand of Rs. 436 crores has been raised without granting adequate opportunity to the Petitioner. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that initially the notices were not served upon the Petitioner and when they were served in the jail, the Petitioner was moved out to other jails at different locations other than Tihar Jail. She emphasises that the Petitioner was in Judicial custody and had no means to adequately defend himself. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner states that an appeal was filed by the Petitioner before the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal (II) assailing the ex parte assessment orders for the Assessment Year 2005-06 to 2011-12, however, the same were returned with numerous objections /deficiencies. Since the assessment years involved in the present case are more than ten years old, this Court disposes of the present writ petition and pending applications with a direction to Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee to provide legal assistance to the Petitioner, in the event, the petitioner applies for it. The Petitioner is given liberty to re-file/file appeals before Appellate Authorities along with the applications for condonation of delay and stay.

Page 3 of 4

The said applications shall be considered by the Appellate Authorities in accordance with law as well as in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. The Petitioner is further given liberty to file an application for release of copies of documents seized from the Petitioner‟s premises during search and seizure operation. In the event, such an application is filed, the same shall be decided by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer in accordance with law.” 5. We may note that Ms Jha submits that apart from the appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the petitioner in this case having regard to the experience of her husband, also seeks a direction from this court for being furnished soft copies of seized documents and electronic data available in DVDs/CDs/ Pen-Drives/HDDs without payment of any fees. 6. Mr Ruchir Bhatia, learned senior standing counsel, who appears on behalf of the respondent/revenue, says that he will return with instructions, on this aspect of the matter. 7. Accordingly, issue notice. 7.1 Mr Bhatia accepts notice on behalf of the respondent/revenue. 8. If instructions are received to resist the appeal, a counter- affidavit will be filed before the next date of hearing. 9. List the matter on 20.09.2023.”

3.

Today, we have disposed of an interlocutory application, i.e., CM No. 45193/2023 preferred in W.P.(C) 4649/2022, whereby certain additional directions have been issued in favour of the petitioner’s husband, i.e., Ulhas Prabhakar Khaire Alias Sh. Lokeshwar Dev. These directions are also set- forth hereafter: “7. However, having regard to the fact that the petitioner and his spouse have been in custody for a very long time and it is claimed that they do not have funds to progress their legal rights to contest the demands made against them by the respondent/revenue which runs into Rs.436 crores [as noticed by the coordinate Bench in its order dated 23.03.2022], we are of the view that the respondents/revenue should make the documents available to the petitioner at their own cost.

Page 4 of 4

7.1 This direction, is issued bearing the mind the principle that access to justice which includes a litigant‟s right to take recourse to a remedy provided by law is embedded in Article 21 of the Constitution. Thus, given the facts and circumstances of this case the said principle will apply to the petitioner as well. 8. Therefore, the above-captioned application is disposed of with the following directions: (i) Insofar as the documents which are available in electronic mode are concerned, the petitioner will be allowed to replicate the same on a hard-disk, under the supervision of the officer appointed by the respondents/revenue. (ii) Copies of the documents, which are available in hard-copy, will be furnished to the petitioner by the respondents/revenue at their own cost.”

4.

Mr Ruchir Bhatia, learned senior standing counsel, who appears on behalf of respondent/revenue, says that the directions contained in the order dated 23.03.2022 passed in W.P.(C) 4649/2022 and the order passed in CM No. 45193/2023 filed in W.P.(C) 4649/2022 can be applied mutatis mutandis to this writ petition as well. 5. It is ordered accordingly. 6. The writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. 7. Pending application shall stand closed. 8. Parties will act based on the digitally signed copy of the order.

RAJIV SHAKDHER JUDGE

GIRISH KATHPALIA JUDGE OCTOBER 30, 2023/RY Click here to check corrigendum, if any

More judgments on Section 153A

All 18,957 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →