Mahendra Sisodia V. Income Tax Officer, ITO Ward, Neem Ka Thana and Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT)

CW/15336/2023

AI Insights

The petitioner, Mahendra Sisodia, challenged the approval order of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT), arguing that the file should not have been routed through the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (JCIT) as it contravened statutory requirements for procedural conduct. The petitioner contended that the involvement of the JCIT was unnecessary and violated the principle that statutory provisions must be followed as explicitly stated. The court examined the procedural history and found that the PCIT had indeed applied its own judgment independently, despite the JCIT's comments, thus validating the approval process.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 679497 (HC-RAJASTHAN)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 29-09-2023
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Union of India & Ors. Vs. Mahendra Singh; Civil Appeal No.4807 of 2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: SANDEEP PATHAK
• Assessee Lawyers: AKSHAY SHARMA
• Keywords: Income Tax; Legal Procedure; PCIT approval; JCIT remarks
• Section: 151

Judgement Text

"[2023:RJ-JP:25798-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15336/2023 Mahendra Sisodia Son of Shri Kajor Mal Sisodia, aged about 41 Years, resident of 1, Tiwarion Ka Mohalla, Reengus, Sikar, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Income Tax Officer, ITO Ward, Neem Ka Thana, Near Santoshi Mata Mandir, Chhawani Road, Khetri Mode, Godawas Road, Neem Ka Thana, Rajasthan 332713 2. Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), represented through its Chairman having office at Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi- 110011 ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Akshay Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sandeep Pathak HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 29/09/2023 Heard. This petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order of approval of PCIT on the submission that the PCIT though has granted approval, the file could not have been routed through the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax. He submits that the processing of the file of the case of approval through JCIT to the JCIT is not permissible as it violates the principle that where the statue provides for a thing to be done in particular manner, that has to be done in that manner and no other manner. He places reliance upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of [2023:RJ-JP:25798-DB] (2 of 3) [CW-15336/2023] Union of India & Ors. Vs. Mahendra Singh; Civil Appeal No.4807 of 2022, decided on 25.07.2022. The record which has been placed itself shows that the concerned Assessing Authority forwarded the case of the petitioner for grant of approval of the PCIT-2 Jaipur. The note sheets which have been obtained and placed on record also shows that the Assessing Authority forwarded the proposal which was routed through the Joint Commissioner with his comments. However, it is more than clear from the note sheets itself that the record were placed before the competent authority i.e. PCIT -2, Jaipur who applied its mind and granted approval in terms of requirement of law as provided in Section 151 of the Income Tax Act. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the case of approval should have been directly placed before the PCIT and there was no legal requirement of obtaining remarks of Joint Commissioner. The arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner is completely misconceived in law as well as on fact. Present is not a case where the competent authority has not at all applied its mind and has granted approval. Merely because the file relating to approval contains a remark by the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, does not in any manner result in wrongful exercise of jurisdiction by the PCIT as long as PCIT applied its own mind on the basis of material available on record. Remarks of the JCIT are only to facilitate PCIT to apply its mind. In view of the details order of PCIT applying its mind and then granting approval, no case is made out for interference. [2023:RJ-JP:25798-DB] (3 of 3) [CW-15336/2023] Accordingly, this Civil Writ Petition is dismissed. All pending applications also stand dismissed. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),J 15-/DHARMENDRA RAKHECHA "