Ghanshyam Agarwal Prop. M/s. Chandani Craft V. Union Of India through Principal Secretary Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, North Block, New Delhi and Income Tax Officer ward 1(2) Aayakar Bhawan, Paota \\u2018C\u2019 Road, Jodhpur

CW/8452/2011

AI Insights

The case involves multiple writ petitions filed by Ghanshyam Agarwal, the proprietor of M/s. Chandani Craft, against the Union of India and the Income Tax Officer, ward 1(2), Jodhpur. The petitions challenge the notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, alleging that the notices were issued without the necessary sanction from the Joint Additional Commissioner and without providing reasons for initiating the proceedings. The petitioner argued that the requirements of Sections 147/148 were not met, referencing the Supreme Court's decision in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. Income-tax Officer, which outlines the procedure following the issuance of a notice under Section 148. The court found that the objections raised by the petitioner had not been addressed and thus provided the opportunity to file fresh objections, mandating a decision on these objections before any further action could be taken.

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 803024 (HC-RAJASTHAN)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 03-08-2017
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. Income-tax Officer [2002] 125 TAXMAN 963 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: K K BISSA
• Assessee Lawyers: SURENDRA MEHTA
• Keywords: Notice under section 148; Objections to issuance of notice; Reasons for starting the proceedings; Sanction of the Joint Additional Commissioner; Speaking order; Violation of the provisions
• Section: 147; 148

Judgement Text

"HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8450 / 2011 Ghanshyam Agarwal Prop. M/s. Chandani Craft C-11-B, MIA, 2nd Phase, Basni, Jodhpur ----Petitioner Versus 1. Union Of India through Principal Secretary Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, North Block, New Delhi. 2. Income Tax Officer ward 1(2) Aayakar Bhawan, Paota ‘C’ Road, Jodhpur. ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8451 / 2011 Ghanshyam Agarwal Prop. M/s. Chandani Craft C-11-B, MIA, 2nd Phase, Basni, Jodhpur ----Petitioner Versus 1. Union Of India through Principal Secretary Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, North Block, New Delhi. 2. Income Tax Officer ward 1(2) Aayakar Bhawan, Paota ‘C’ Road, Jodhpur. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8452 / 2011 Ghanshyam Agarwal Prop. M/s. Chandani Craft C-11-B, MIA, 2nd Phase, Basni, Jodhpur ----Petitioner Versus 1. Union Of India through Principal Secretary Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, North Block, New Delhi. 2. Income Tax Officer ward 1(2) Aayakar Bhawan, Paota ‘C’ Road, Jodhpur. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8453 / 2011 Ghanshyam Agarwal Prop. M/s. Chandani Craft C-11-B, MIA, 2nd Phase, Basni, Jodhpur ----Petitioner Versus 1. Union Of India through Principal Secretary Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, North Block, New Delhi. (2 of 3) [CW-8450/2011] 2. Income Tax Officer ward 1(2) Aayakar Bhawan, Paota ‘C’ Road, Jodhpur. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10571 / 2011 Ghanshyam Agarwal Prop. M/s. Chandani Craft C-11-B, MIA, 2nd Phase, Basni, Jodhpur ----Petitioner Versus 1. Union Of India through Principal Secretary Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, North Block, New Delhi. 2. Income Tax Officer ward 1(2) Aayakar Bhawan, Paota ‘C’ Road, Jodhpur. _____________________________________________________ For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Surendra Mehta For Respondent(s) : Mr. K.K. Bissa _____________________________________________________ HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIRMALJIT KAUR Order 03/08/2017 All the above mentioned writ petitions shall stand decided by this common order as the issue involved is identical. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the notice under Section 148 was issued in violation of the provisions of the Act. No sanction of the Joint Additional Commissioner was obtained. Further no reasons for starting the proceedings in the present case are mentioned. The requirement of Sections 147/148 are not satisfied. It is a well settled proposition of law as laid down in the judgment rendered by the Apex Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. Income-tax Officer [2002] 125 TAXMAN 963 (SC), when a notice under Section 148 of the (3 of 3) [CW-8450/2011] Income Tax Act is issued, the proper course of action for the noticee is to file return and if he so desires, to seek reasons for issuing notices. The Assessing Officer is bound to furnish reasons within a reasonable time. On receipt of reasons, the noticee is entitled to file objections to issuance of notice and the Assessing Authority is bound to dispose of the same by passing a speaking order. In the present case, the objections filed by the petitioner have not been decided till date. In view of the above, the petitions are disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to file fresh objections before the Assessing Authority. In case, same is filed within two weeks from today, the assessing authority shall consider the same in accordance with law and pass a speaking order. Till as such time the said objections are decided, the assessing authority shall not proceed further. Thereafter, the petitioner is at liberty to challenge the adverse order passed against him, if any, in accordance with law. A copy of this order be placed in each connected file. (NIRMALJIT KAUR), J. sanjaysolanki,pa Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) "