M/s BALAJEE LOHA PRIVATE LIMITED V. UNION OF INDIA

WPT/150/2022

AI Insights

The case involves M/s Balajee Loha Private Limited, represented by its director Shri Bhagwan Das Agrawal, challenging the notices issued under section 148 of the IT Act. The Supreme Court's decision in Union of India & Others v. Ashish Agarwal, which addressed similar issues, was cited. The Supreme Court's ruling modified the application of section 148 notices, requiring them to be treated as show-cause notices under section 148A, thereby altering the procedural requirements for such notices. This case was disposed of based on the precedent set by the Supreme Court, which aimed to standardize the handling of similar cases across India and reduce the burden of appeals on the Supreme Court.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 724532 (HC-CHHATTISGARH)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 11-05-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Union of India & Others v. Ashish Agarwal
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: RAM NARAYAN SAHU; AMIT CHAUDHARI
• Assessee Lawyers: APURV GOYAL
• Keywords: Finance Act 2021; Income Tax; Show cause notices; Unamended section 148
• Section: 148; 148A

Judgement Text

"1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPT No. 150 of 2022 M/s Balajee Loha Private Limited A Company Incorporated Under Companies Act, 2013, Through Its Director Shri Bhagwan Das Agrawal, Aged About 57 Years, Registered Office At 206, Bajrang Nagar, Near Agrasen Chowk, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner Versus 1. Union of India Through The Ld. Secretary, Ministry of Finance, (Department Of Revenue) No. 137, North Block, New Delhi 110001. 2. Central Board Of Direct Tax, Through Its Ld. Chairman Ministry Of Finance (Department Of Revenue) North Block, New Delhi-110002 3. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Raipur -1, New C.R. Building, Civil Lines, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 4. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax 1(1), Raipur, Aayakar Bhawan, Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 5. Additional/joint/deputy/assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax/income Tax Officer, National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi (Now Known As National Faceless Assessment Centre), Ministry Of Finace (Department Of Revenue) North Block, New Delhi -110001 ---- Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Apurv Goyal, Advocate For Respondent No.1 : Mr. Ram Narayan Sahu, CGC For Respondent Nos. 2 to 5 : Mr. Amit Chaudhari, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant , Judge Order on Board Per Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice 11.05.2022 Mr. Apurv Goyal, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Ram Narayan Sahu, learned Central Government Counsel, appearing for respondent No.1 and Mr. Amit Chaudhari, learned counsel, appearing for respondent Nos. 2 to 5 submit that this matter is squarely covered by judgment of the 2 Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in Union of India & Others v. Ashish Agarwal, reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 543. 2. The Hon’ble Supreme Court disposed of the same holding as follows : “26. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, the present Appeals are ALLOWED IN PART. The impugned common judgment and orders passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in W.T. No. 524/2021 and other allied tax appeals/petitions, is/are hereby modified and substituted as under:- (i) The impugned section 148 notices issued to the respective assessees which were issued under unamended section 148 of the IT Act, which were the subject matter of writ petitions before the various respective High Courts shall be deemed to have been issued under section 148A of the IT Act as substituted by the Finance Act, 2021 and construed or treated to be show-cause notices in terms of section 148A(b). The assessing officer shall, within thirty days from today provide to the respective assessees information and material relied upon by the Revenue, so that the assessees can reply to the show-cause notices within two weeks thereafter; (ii) The requirement of conducting any enquiry, if required, with the prior approval of specified 3 authority under section 148A(a) is hereby dispensed with as a one-time measure vis-a-vis those notices which have been issued under section 148 of the unamended Act from 01.04.2021 till date, including those which have been quashed by the High Courts. Even otherwise as observed hereinabove holding any enquiry with the prior approval of specified authority is not mandatory but it is for the concerned Assessing Officers to hold any enquiry, if required; (iii) The assessing officers shall thereafter pass orders in terms of section 148A(d) in respect of each of the concerned assessees; Thereafter after following the procedure as required under Section 148A may issue notice under section 148 (as substituted); (iv) All defences which may be available to the assesses including those available under section 149 of the IT Act and all rights and contentions which may be available to the concerned assesses and Revenue under the Finance Act, 2021 and in law shall continue to be available. 27. The present order shall be applicable PAN INDIA and all judgments and orders passed by different High Courts on the issue and under which similar notices which were 4 issued after 01.04.2021 issued under section 148 of the Act are set aside and shall be governed by the present order and shall stand modified to the aforesaid extent. The present order is passed in exercise of powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India so as to avoid any further appeals by the Revenue on the very issue by challenging similar judgments and orders, with a view not to burden this Court with approximately 9000 appeals. We also observe that present order shall also govern the pending writ petitions, pending before various High Courts in which similar notices under Section 148 of the Act issued after 01.04.2021 are under challenge. 28. The impugned common judgments and orders passed by the High Court of Allahabad and the similar judgments and orders passed by various High Courts, more particularly, the respective judgments and orders passed by the various High Courts particulars of which are mentioned hereinabove, shall stand modified/substituted to the aforesaid extent only. 3. In view of the above submission, this petition stands disposed of in terms of the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Sd/- Sd/- (Arup Kumar Goswami) (Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Chief Justice Judge Chandra "