Balmiki Singh V. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Muzaffarpur and The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 (1), Muzaffarpur

CWJC/7875/2017

AI Insights

The case involves Balmiki Singh, the petitioner, challenging the assessment order and the subsequent revision order concerning his income tax for the year 2012-13. The petitioner, claiming to be an agriculturist, had a significant sum deposited in his bank account, which led to allegations of concealment of income. The petitioner argued that he was not given a proper opportunity to present his documents and evidence at both the assessment and revision stages. The respondents, representing the Income Tax Department, contended that opportunities were provided but not utilized by the petitioner. The court, considering the circumstances, decided to grant another opportunity to the petitioner to present his case before the Assessing Officer.

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 797694 (HC-PATNA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 03-08-2018
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: RISHI RAJ SINHA; SHILPI KESHRI
• Assessee Lawyers: KRISHNA NANDAN SINGH; SRIRAM KRISHNA
• Keywords: Agricultural income; Income tax assessment; Revision petition; Opportunity to Produce Evidence
• Section: 147; 264

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7875 of 2017 ====================================================== Balmiki Singh, Son of Mahesh Singh, village and P.O. Gorigama, P.S. Minapur, District Muzaffarpur, 843117. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Bela Kothi, Ramkrishna Ashram Road, Bela, Muzaffarpur 2. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 (1), Bela Kothi, Ramkrishna Ashram Road, Bela, Muzaffarpur. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dr. Krishna Nandan Singh, Sr. Advocate Mr. Sriram Krishna, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Rishi Raj Sinha, Advocate Ms. Shilpi Keshri, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date : 03-08-2018 Challenging the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer on 16.02.2016 with regard to assessment of income for the year 2012-13 (Annexure-P-1) and the order Annexure-P-9 passed by the Principal Commissioner, Income Tax, Muzaffarpur on 28.03.2017 in exercise of his powers under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, this writ petition has been filed. At the very outset, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner argued that the petitioner would be satisfied if the assessment is undertaken after granting him an opportunity Patna High Court CWJC No.7875 of 2017 dt.03-08-2018 2/4 to produce his documents and evidence as it is a case where proper opportunity of submitting the documents and material has been denied to him. Refuting the aforesaid contention, learned counsel appearing for the Revenue vehemently argued that in spite of opportunities granted before the Assessing Officer and again before the Revisional Authority in the proceeding under Section 264 the petitioner and his counsel failed to avail of the opportunity and having failed to do so, now after such a long period of time indulgence into the matter is not called for. We have considered the aforesaid contentions advanced and we find that the petitioner claims to be an agriculturist and it is said that for the year in question a sum of Rs. 24,26,383/- was deposited by him in his account in the State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur. Finding it to be concealment of assessment, proceedings were initiated by the Assessing Officer under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act. It is the case of the petitioner that he was required to appear in the matter before the Assessing Officer on 21.02.2017. He received the notice on 20th of February, 2017, rushed to Muzaffarpur to meet his lawyer who was not available and, therefore, filed a petition for seeking time. This was not Patna High Court CWJC No.7875 of 2017 dt.03-08-2018 3/4 granted and the Assessment order was passed after a month and the order supplied to him. He, therefore, filed Revision Petition and in the Revision Petition also even though it seems that opportunities were granted to him but because of some lapse on the part of his counsel the petitioner pleads that he was not apprised of the date fixed and appropriate opportunity to lead evidence or document to show that the income is derived from the sale of agricultural land and, therefore, exempt from the payment of tax, has been denied to the petitioner. Considering the totality of the circumstances, we deem it appropriate that at least one opportunity should be granted to the petitioner to give his say before the competent Assessing Officer and thereafter the Assessing Officer will proceed in the matter in accordance with law. Accordingly, we allow this petition, quash both the Assessment order dated 16.02.2016 and the order of revision passed dated 28.03.2017 and direct that the petitioner shall appear before the Assessing Officer along with certified copy of this order on 17th of August, 2018 and produce all evidence and document as he requires and thereafter the Assessing Officer will proceed in the matter in accordance with law. In case of any default committed by the petitioner in not complying with the Patna High Court CWJC No.7875 of 2017 dt.03-08-2018 4/4 aforesaid direction, the Assessing Officer is free to proceed in the matter without granting any opportunity to the petitioner. With the aforesaid, the writ petition stands allowed and disposed of. P.K.P./- (Rajendra Menon, CJ) (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 06.08.2018 Transmission Date "