M/s Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company And Anr. V. The Commissioner Of Income Tax And Ors.

WPT/37/2013

AI Insights

The case involves M/s Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited and M/s Chhattisgarh State Power Trading Company Limited as petitioners, who challenged the reduction of the response period from 30 days to 5 days in a notice issued under section 156 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The notice was issued by the Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) and other officials as respondents. The petitioners argued that the reduction in time did not allow them sufficient opportunity to appeal against the assessment/fine/penalty as provided under clause 6 of the notice. The court issued an interim order to maintain the status quo and ultimately resolved the issue by restoring the 30-day period for the petitioners to respond to the notice.

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 751246 (HC-CHHATTISGARH)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 11-04-2013
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: ANAND DADARIYA
• Assessee Lawyers: NEELABH DUBEY
• Keywords: Demand notice; Income Tax; Writ petition; Notice Reduction
• Section: 156; 220(1)

Judgement Text

"7 IN THE HON'BLE HIGHCQURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASFUR (C.G.l Writ Petition (T) No. -^^ of 2013 PETITIONER ^ ^s^^ » y <(^J^ ^ :1. M/s Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company (hereinafter referred to as CSPDCL) Limited duly incorporated under the Companies Act 1956, having its office at Vidyut Bhawan, Danganiya, at Raipur Chhattisgarh, through authorized signatory and DGM (Finance) R.K. Verma, S/o Shri R.S. Dhurandher, aged about 40 years, R/o Vidyut Sewa Bhawan, Ground Floor P.S. Danganiya, Raipur 2 R.K. Verma S/o Shri R.S. Dhurandhar, aged about 40 years, R/o Vidyut Sewa Bhawan, Ground Floor P.S. DanganiyEl, Raipur, DGM (Finance) and authorized signatory of the petitioner no. 1 VERSUS RESPONDENTS : 1. The Coininissioner of Incoine Tax (TDS), Reena Apartments, PachpediNaka, Raipur (C.G.) ^ 2. Joint Conunissioner of Income Tax (TDS),Reena Apartments, PachpediNaka, Raipur (C.G.) 1 ' • 3. Deputy Commissioner Incorae Tax (TDS), Raipur (C.G.) ~s Before: Hon'ble the Chief Justice and his comoanion Judges of the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature for Chhattlsgarh at Bilaspur. Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of suitable directions. orders or writs including writs in the nature of inandanius certiorari etc. ~s HIGM COURT OF CHHATriSGARH ATBILASPUR WRIT PETmON.CTLNo, 3Zof2Q13 PETITIONER : M/s. Chhattisga'rh State Power Distribution Company Limited & Andther. VERSUS Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) & Others. — RESPONDENTS PETITIONER WRITPET!T!QN (T) No. 39 of 2013 M/s. Chhattisgarh State Power Trading Company Limited & Another. VERSUS Commissioner of Income Tax CTDS) & Others. RESPONDENTS : WRITPETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTIQNOF INDIA SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Aanihotri, J. Present: Shri Neelabh Dubey, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri Anand Dadariya, Advocate for the respondents. ORDER (OPEN COURT) (Passed on 11th day ofApril, 2013) 1. Since common facts and question of law are involved in these petitions i.e. W.P. (T) No. 37 and 39 of 2013, and as such, the petitions are bejng disposed of by this common order. 2. Grievance of the petitioners was to the reduction of 30 days as prescribed under section 220(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to 5 days in the impugned notice dated 18.03.2013 (Annexure P/1) under section 156, ibid. 3. This Court, while issuing notice to the respondents, passed an interim order on 02.04.2013 and 03.04.2013, respectively, not totake any coercive steps for a period of 30 days from the date of the notice i.e. 18.03.2013. Nbw, reduction of 30 days to 5 days has been resolved and the petitioner has got 30 days time to act upon the notice of demand under section 156 of the of Act, 1961. ~s IK Kh ft 4. Clause 6 of the said notice clearly states that if the petitioner intends to appeal against the assessment/fine/penalty, it may present an appeal under Part A of Chapter XX of the Act, 1961 to the Cohimissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) within 30 days from the date of receipt of the said notice in Form No. 35, duly stamped and verified as laid down in that form. 5. Shri Dubey, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had already taken recourse to statutory appellate forum. 6. In view of that, nothing survives for adjudication at this stage. Since the protection for 30 days from 18.03.2013 was granted from the date of its issue, the same shall continue for a period of 30 days from 18.03.2013. 7. If the period of demand notice is reduced from 30 days to 5 days, the assessee 'would not be in a position to avail the remedy provided under clause 6 of the said notice. The authorities, while issuing notice under section 156 ibid, have not considered the remedy avaiiable to the petitioner under the clause (6) of the said notice while redudng the period of 30 days to 5 days. On that account also, the assessee was entitled to 30 days in lieu of 5 days. 8. With the aforesaid observation and direction, both these petitions stand disposed of. 9. No order asto costs. sai- Satish K. Agaifaoti i Judge Amit ~s "