OSSIAN CORPORATION V. UNION OF INDIA

CW/15380/2023

AI Insights

Ossian Corporation filed a writ petition challenging a show cause notice/order issued by the Assessing Officer under the Income Tax Act, claiming it was barred by limitation. The petitioner argued that the limitation period for reassessment had expired, referencing a previous stay and the dismissal of an earlier writ petition. The respondents countered that the notice was issued within the extended time frame allowed by law, considering the stay period and the extension provided by a specific notification. The court examined the timelines and legal provisions, ultimately concluding that the notice was validly issued within the extended limitation period.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 724503 (HC-RAJASTHAN)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 13-10-2023
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: ASG Hospital Pvt. Ltd.
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: K K BISSA; G S CHOUHAN
• Assessee Lawyers: ANJAY KOTHARI; MUKESH GURJAR
• Keywords: Limitation; Reassessment; Show cause notice; Stay order
• Section: 147; 148; 142(1); 153

Judgement Text

"[2023:RJ-JD:34852-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15380/2023 Ossian Corporation, Khasra No. 319/4, Suncity Nagar, Opp. Thar Dry Port, Pal Road, Jodhpur. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Union Of India, Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Finance, Department Of Revenue, North Block, New Delhi. 2. The Assessing Officer, National E-Assessment Centre, Income Tax Department, Ministry Of Finance, (Inside Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium) New Delhi. 3. The Income Tax Officer, Ward - 3(4), Income Tax Department, Aayakar Bhawan, Paota 'C' Road, Jodhpur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anjay Kothari Mr. Mukesh Gurjar For Respondent(s) : Mr. K.K.Bissa Mr. G.S.Chouhan HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT Order Reserved on 11/10/2023 Pronounced on 13/10/2023 By the Court (Per Hon’ble Yogendra Kumar Purohit,J.) 1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner- assessee for quashing the impugned show cause notice/ order dated 27.09.2023 (Annexure-7) issued by the respondent No.2 and to restrain the respondents from taking any proceedings pursuant to the impugned notice/order. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent Assessing Officer issued a notice dated 20.03.2020 under Section 148 of the [2023:RJ-JD:34852-DB] (2 of 6) [CW-15380/2023] Income Tax Act (for short \"the Act\") to the petitioner for the Assessment Year 2013-14. The petitioner challenged the said notice dated 20.03.2020 before this Court by filing writ petition which was registered as D.B.Civil Writ Petition No.3479/2021, wherein by an interim order dated 24.02.2021 this Court stayed further proceedings pursuant to the notice dated 20.03.2020. However, the aforesaid writ petition was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 13.03.2023 in absence of the counsel for the petitioner. 3. It is averred on behalf of the petitioner that as per the provisions of Section 153 of the Act, the limitation for passing the reassessment order after the dismissal of the Writ Petition No.3479/2021 had already expired on 12.05.2023. However, the respondent No.2 issued an intimation letter on 26.07.2023 in relation to the reassessment proceedings for the A.Y. 2013-14, which was replied by the petitioner on 30.7.2023 submitting therein that the said notice is barred by limitation. 4. Thereafter, the respondent No.2 issued notice dated 21.08.2023 under Section 142 (1) of the Act. The petitioner by reply dated 26.08.2023 again raised the contention regarding expiry of limitation as per the provisions of Section 153 of the Act. A detailed reply was also filed by the petitioner on 28.8.2023. It is submitted that the respondent No.2 by the impugned show cause notice/order dated 27.09.2023 has arbitrarily rejected the ground of limitation raised by the petitioner without appreciating the provisions of law in correct perspective. Hence this writ petition. [2023:RJ-JD:34852-DB] (3 of 6) [CW-15380/2023] 5. The respondents have filed a detailed reply to the writ petition justifying their action in passing the impugned notice well within limitation. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. The main argument of the petitioner is that as per the provisions of Section 153 (2) of the Act, no order of assessment/ reassessment or re-computation shall be made under Section 147 after the expiry of twelve months from the end of the financial year in which the notice under Section 148 was served, and such period of twelve months in the present case was expiring on 31.3.2021. 8. It is submitted that by virtue of stay order dated 24.02.2021 passed by this Court in D.B.Civil Writ Petition No. 3479/2021, the assessment proceedings remained in currency till its dismissal on 13.03.2023 and the said period from 24.02.2021 to 13.03.2023 was required to be excluded from computation of limitation as stipulated under Explanation 1 (ii) of Section 153 (2) of the Act. It is argued that as per proviso to Section 153 of the Act, immediately after exclusion of the period as per said Explanation 1 (ii), if the period of limitation available to the Assessing Officer for making an order of assessment, reassessment or re-computation is less than sixty days, the same shall be deemed to be extended to sixty days. According to learned counsel, from the dismissal of the writ petition on 13.03.2023, sixty days’ time was available to the respondents for completing the reassessment proceedings and passing the order i.e. from 13.03.2023 to 12.05.2023 and [2023:RJ-JD:34852-DB] (4 of 6) [CW-15380/2023] therefore, the limitation for passing the reassessment order stood expired on 12.5.2023. 9. The petitioner has also claimed parity with the case of similarly situated assessee i.e. ASG Hospital Pvt. Ltd., wherein, according to the petitioner, the stand of the respondents was that the limitation in that case was expiring on 12.5.2023. 10. Accordingly, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the notice impugned is clearly barred by limitation and the same deserves to be quashed and set aside. 11. Learned counsel for the Revenue argued that had there been no stay order granted by the Court, the assessment was required to be completed in the present case by 30.9.2021 as per Notification No.10 of 2021 dated 27.2.2021 extending the period of limitation. However, the assessment proceedings were stayed by this Court on 24.02.2021, therefore, from 24.02.2021 to 30.9.2021 total 219 days’ period was available with the respondents to pass the order. The period during which the stay was in currency i.e. from 24.2.2021 to 13.03.2023 is required to be excluded from counting the period of limitation as per the provisions of the Act. Thus, according to learned counsel, from 13.03.2023 when this Court dismissed the writ petition, the aforesaid period of 219 days will be available to the department to complete the reassessment and accordingly, the date of completion of reassessment comes to 18.10.2023. Thus, according to learned counsel, the respondents’ action in passing the impugned notice is perfectly in accordance with law and same does not require any interference by this Court. [2023:RJ-JD:34852-DB] (5 of 6) [CW-15380/2023] 12. In the instant case, as per the notification No.10 of 2021/S.O.966 (E) dated 27th Feb.2021, the period for completion of reassessment was extended from 31.3.2021 to 30.9.2021 and this Court stayed the proceedings on 24.2.2021, therefore, from the said date, time to complete the reassessment was available upto 30.9.2021 i.e. total 219 days were available with the department for completing the proceedings. The stay granted on 24.2.2021 remained operative till 13.3.2023 which period is required to be excluded as per the provisions of the Act and after dismissal of the assessee’s writ petition on 13.3.2023, the period for completion of the reassessment proceedings is to be counted from 13.3.2023 by adding 219 days which comes to 18.10.2023. Thus, time upto 18.10.2023 is available to the Revenue to complete the reassessment proceedings. 13. In this view of the matter, the stand taken by the petitioner regarding the impugned show cause notice/order being barred by limitation is not sustainable. The assessee is still having sufficient opportunity to defend his case during assessment proceedings by requesting for personal hearing and submitting documents well within time. 14. So far as the stand taken by the petitioner claiming parity with the case of similarly situated assessee i.e. ASG Hospital Pvt. Ltd. is concerned, as already discussed earlier, 219 days’ period was available on the date of granting stay and accordingly, after dismissal of the writ petition on 13.03.2023, again that period of 219 days will be available to the department for completing the reassessment proceedings thereby the reassessment proceedings are to be completed by 18.10.2023 and therefore, we do not find [2023:RJ-JD:34852-DB] (6 of 6) [CW-15380/2023] any substance in the argument raised by the petitioner regarding parity also. 15. Resultantly, in our considered opinion, the impugned show cause notice does not suffer from any illegality or perversity. The writ petition is dismissed being devoid of any merit. Stay application also stands dismissed. (YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT),J (VIJAY BISHNOI),J RP/- "