Facts of the
Case
The present writ petition was filed challenging the
order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, along
with the consequential notice issued under Section 148, both dated 31
March 2022 for Assessment Year 2018–19.
The petitioner contended that upon receiving a
notice dated 17 March 2022, he sought an adjournment on 23 March 2022
requesting additional time up to 02 April 2022 to file a reply. The petitioner
subsequently submitted a reply via email on 30 March 2022 due to closure of the
online portal.
However, the respondent passed an ex-parte order without considering the said reply, allegedly violating statutory provisions and resulting in miscarriage of justice.
Issues
Involved
- Whether passing an order under Section 148A(d) without considering
the petitioner’s reply amounts to violation of principles of natural
justice.
- Whether the reassessment proceedings under Section 148 are valid in
absence of supply of incriminating material.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to relief when no substantive reply on merits was filed before the Assessing Officer.
Petitioner’s
Arguments
- The respondent failed to consider the reply submitted via email
before passing the impugned order.
- The order under Section 148A(d) was passed in violation of statutory
mandate and principles of natural justice.
- Adequate opportunity of being heard was not provided.
Respondent’s
Arguments
- The petitioner did not submit any reply on merits but merely
requested documents/information.
- The petitioner delayed seeking relevant documents and approached
the Court belatedly.
- The reassessment proceedings had already progressed to the stage of Section 148.
Court’s
Findings / Order
- The petitioner’s reply did not deal with the merits of the case and
only sought documents from the respondent.
- If the petitioner required documents, such request should have been
made at the earliest stage and not after significant delay.
- Since the matter had already progressed to the Section 148 stage,
interference was not warranted.
- The respondent was directed to supply incriminating
material/information within four weeks.
- The petitioner was granted liberty to raise all contentions before
the Assessing Officer.
- The writ petition was disposed of with directions.
Important
Clarification
- Mere request for documents without addressing merits is
insufficient to challenge reassessment proceedings.
- Delay in seeking relevant information weakens the petitioner’s
case.
- Courts may decline interference once reassessment proceedings reach an advanced stage, but may still protect procedural fairness.
Sections
Involved
- Section 148 – Income escaping assessment
- Section 148A(d) – Order prior to issuance of notice under Section
148
- Principles of Natural Justice
Link to download the order -https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/showFileJudgment/MMH10112022CW153892022_185257.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and
knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information
from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or
advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability
arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the
assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment