GURU CHARAN AKELA V. PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WPC/1993/2022

AI Insights

The case involves Guru Charan Akela, the petitioner, who challenged the proceedings initiated by the Income Tax Department under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2013-14. The petitioner argued that the notice and subsequent reassessment were invalid as they did not comply with mandatory requirements and were barred by limitation. The respondents contended that the notice was valid under the amended provisions of the Income Tax Act. After initial arguments, the petitioner decided to withdraw the writ petition to pursue the matter through the appellate authority, reserving the right to raise all valid grounds in the appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 762945 (HC-JHARKHAND)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 21-09-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: RATNESH SAHAY
• Assessee Lawyers: BIREN PODDAR; MAHENDRA CHOWDHARY; RAKHI SHARMA
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Income Tax; Limitation; Notice; Reassessment
• Section: 147; 148; 119; 149; 144B

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P (T) No. 1993 of 2022 Guru Charan Akela --- --- Petitioner Versus 1. Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi 2. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, Income Tax Department, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi through Additional /Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 3. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Dhanbad --- --- Respondents --- CORAM: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Roshan --- For the Petitioner: M/s Biren Poddar, Sr. Advocate, Mahendra Kr. Chowdhary, Rakhi Sharma, Advocates For the Respondents: Mr. Ratnesh Ranjan Sahay, Sr. S.C. ---- 04 / 21.09.2022 Writ petition was preferred with the following prayers. a. For a declaration that the entire proceeding allegedly initiated by the Respondent Department in pursuance of purported notice dated 27.03.2021 (Annexure-2) issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 including the reassessment proceedings u/s 147 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, against the Petitioner for the Assessment Year 2013-14 is null and void-abinitio, as the mandatory requirement for initiation of such proceeding has not been duly complied with by the concerned Respondent. b. For a further declaration that the entire proceeding initiated by the Respondents in pursuance of purported Notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and all such subsequent action taken pursuant thereto, are hopelessly barred by limitation under Section 149 of the said Act, as the same has been admittedly alleged to be issued on 27.03.2021 i.e. after lapse of more than six years from the end of the relevant assessment year i.e. 2013-14 and is not maintainable in view of Instruction dated 04.03.2021 (Annexure-17) read with Instruction dated 12.03.2021 (Annexure-18) issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), which instructions are binding upon the Income Tax Authorities as provided u/s 119 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. c. For quashing and setting aside the Assessment Order dated 23.03.2022 (Annexure-16) passed u/s 147 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Respondent No. 2, whereby the said Authority without considering any of the points raised by the Petitioner in his reply dated 21.02.2022 (Annexure-12) and further reply dated 21.03.2022 (Annexure-15), made addition of an amount of cash deposit of Rs. 2,55,29,837/- u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act. 2. 2. After some arguments, learned senior counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this writ petition with liberty to approach the Appellate Authority against the impugned order of assessment. He submits that all valid grounds may be allowed to be taken in appeal. It may be indicated that the time consumed in the instant writ proceeding may be taken into account while considering the question of condonation of delay. 3. Learned counsel for the Respondents submits that issuance of show- cause notice on 27.03.2021 for the Assessment Year 2013-14 under un- amended section 148 of Income Tax Act is valid in terms of provisions under Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020. Since the assessment order has been passed, petitioner should invoke the Appellate remedy. 4. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, instant writ petition is permitted to be withdrawn in order to invoke appellate remedy. Needless to say, the Appellate Authority should take into consideration the period spent during the instant writ proceeding while considering the question of condonation of delay. It is open for the petitioner to take all valid points on facts and law in such appeal. (Aparesh Kumar Singh, J) (Deepak Roshan, J) Ranjeet/ "