M/S AMISHA IN SKY CREATIONS V. INCOME TAX OFFICER and ANR.

WPT/7752/2011

AI Insights

The case involves M/s Amisha in Sky Creations, represented by Shri Akhilesh Agrawal, challenging the legality and jurisdiction of the orders passed under Section 281B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Income Tax Officer and the Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur. The petitioner sought to quash the orders of attachment made under Section 281B, claiming they were illegal and without jurisdiction. The legal proceedings included an initial rejection of interim relief by a single judge, followed by an appeal to a division bench which issued notices but did not stay the operation of the single judge's order. The main contention was the delay in the Commissioner of Income Tax's decision on the petitioner's application due to the subjudice status of the matter.

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 751304 (HC-CHHATTISGARH)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 07-09-2012
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: ANAND DADARIYA
• Assessee Lawyers: G N PUROHIT; ABHISHEK OSWAL
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Attachment Order; Income Tax; Jurisdiction; Writ petition
• Section: 281B

Judgement Text

"o '1< IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH ATBILASPUR Amended Writ Petition (T) No.7752/2011 / PETITIONER t RESPONDENTS:! 2. M/s Amisha in Sky Creations, 1 Shriram Heights, St. Xavier School Road, Avanti Vihar, Raipur (C.G.), Through Partner Shri Akhilesh Agrawal, S/o Late R.L. Agrawal, Aged about 48 years, R/o 501, G.T. Height, Shankar Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS Income Tax Officer Ward-2(3), Central Revenue building, Civil Lines, Raipur (C.G.) Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines, Raipur (C.G) > '_. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA CHALLBNGING THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT PASSED UNDER SECTION 281B DATED 02.12.2011 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT,1961 l2- ;sr HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION m No. 7752 of201l PETmQNER RESPONDENTS M/s. Amisha in Sky Creations. VERSUS Income Tax Officer Ward - 2(3) & Another; WRIT PETITION UNDERARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB; Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present: Shri G.N.Purohit with Shri Abhishek Oswal, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Anand Dadariya, Advocate for the respondent. ORDER (Passed on 07th day ofSeptember, 2012) By this petition, the petitioner seeks to hold the impugned order dated 02.12.2011 asillegal and without jurisdiction, further, to hold that the order 22.05.2012 (Annexure P/6) passed by the Income Tax Officer, Raipur, as illegal and without jurisdiction and in violation ofthe conditions laid down under Section 281B ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short tthe Act, 1961') and to quash all the orders of attachment made imder section 281B of the Act, 1961. Shri Purohit, leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that against the order dated 18.01.2012, passed in this petition, wherein interim reliefprayed for by the petitioner was rejected, an appeal being W.A. No. 10772012, was filed and the learned Division Benchhas been pleased to issue notice to the respondents, without stay of the operation of the order of learned Single Judge. The learned Division Bench has simply issued notices and not passed any order. On account of that, the Commissioner, Income Tax, is not proceeding to consider the application of the petitioner on the ground that the matter is subjudice, thus, it has been considered appropriate by him to maintam status quo pending the decision ofthe Hon'ble Court on the above stated petition and writ appeal, ofthepetitioner. ; ^' •'^s^ /rt 8. Shri Purohit further submits that the orders passed, which are under challenge in this petition has already out-lived its life. Thus, the Commissioner, Income Tax, be directed to decide the application ofthe petitioner in accordance with law. The learned Division Bench, by order dated 09.04.2012, passed the following order: \"Heard on admission. Issue notice to the respondents. Steps within seven days. List it for further orders afiter four weeks\" On the other hand, Shri Dadariya, leamed counsel appearing for the respondent/Revenue submits that the decision was not taken only in view of pendency of the writ appeal and the writ petition however, the Commissioner, Income Tax, may be directed to proceed with the application filed by the petitioner, before him, in accordance with law, on its own merits. Thus, in view of the foregoing, the Commissioner, Income Tax., is directed to proceed with the application ofthe petitioner, pending before him, and pass appropriate order in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months. In view of the above, according to learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, nothing survives in this petition for adjudication. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. Amit Sd/- SatishK.Agnihotri Judge "