S.V.H. TECH PVT. LTD. V. UNION OF INDIA AND 3 OTHERS

WTAX/294/2022

AI Insights

The case involves S.V.H. Tech Pvt. Ltd., the petitioner, challenging a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, issued by the Income Tax Department for the assessment year 2014-15. The petitioner sought to quash the notice and the subsequent order, and to restrain the respondents from completing the reassessment proceedings. The core of the dispute was whether the notice was issued within the statutory time limit. The respondents provided evidence that the notice was sent via speed post and e-mode, which the petitioner contested. The court, after reviewing the evidence, concluded that the notice was issued timely and dismissed the writ petition.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 731912 (HC-ALLAHABAD)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 08-04-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: A S G I; GAURAV MAHAJAN; KRISHNA AGARWAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SUYASH AGARWAL; ANKUR AGARWAL
• Keywords: Certiorari; Certiorari; Income Tax; Notice; Prohibition; Reassessment; Writ Tax
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

"Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 294 of 2022 Petitioner :- S.V.H. Tech Pvt. Ltd. Respondent :- Union Of India And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Suyash Agarwal,Ankur Agarwal Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,Gaurav Mahajan Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J. Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J. Heard Sri Suyash Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Krishna Agarwal, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents - Income Tax Department. On 24.03.2022, this Court passed the following order :- \"Heard Sri Suyash Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Krishna Agarwal, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent-Income Tax Department. This writ petition has been filed praying for the following relief :- \"(i) Issue a writ, or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned notice u/s 148 of the Act, dated 30.03.2021, received by the petitioner on 01.04.2021, issued by Respondent No.3 for A.Y. 2014-15. (ii) Issue a writ, or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 26.01.2022 passed by Respondent No.4. (iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of prohibition restraining the respondents from completing the reassessment proceedng under 148 of the Act.\" On 10.03.2022, this Court passed the following order :- \"Heard Sri Rakesh Ranjan Agarwal, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Suyash Agarwal and Sri Ankur Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Krishna Agarwal, learned counsel for the Income Tax Department. Learned counsel for the respondent prays for and is granted a week's time to obtain instructions specifically with respect to the proof of date and time of e-mail or placing in assessee e-account notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax 1961. Put up as a fresh case on 14.03.2022.\" Again on 23.03.2022, this Court passed the following order:- \"Shri Krishna Agarwal, learned counsel for the respondent-Income Tax Department, on instructions, states that the impugned notice dated 30.03.2021 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued to the petitioner by e-mode. He further states that the aforesaid notice was also sent to the petitioner by speed post on 31.03.2021. In support, he has placed before the Court a copy of the track consignment report and a copy of the notice dated 30.03.2021. However, copy of the postal receipt has not been produced before us so as to connect it with the copy of the alleged track consignment report as produced today before us. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that he shall seek instructions from the petitioner as to whether the impugned notice has been received by him through registered post. As prayed, put up tomorrow i.e. 24.03.2022 at 10:00 a.m. In the meantime, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department both shall obtain instructions.\" Today, a counter affidavit sworn by Sri Ram Autar, Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2)(3), Ghaziabad,on behalf of respondent nos. 2 to 4 has been filed which is taken on record. Much insistence has been placed by learned counsel for the respondents that the impugned notice has been sent to the petitioner by speed post on 31.03.2021. We have noted in our aforequoted order dated 23.03.2022 that postal receipt has not been produced before us so as to connect it with the copy of the alleged consignment track report. In the counter affidavit filed today, copy of the postal receipt for issuing notice through speed post on 31.03.2021 has not been filed and instead same track report which does not reflect at all the name of the petitioner, has been filed alongwith the counter affidavit. Learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents again prays for time to file copy of postal receipt as proof of sending impugned notices to the petitioner. As prayed, further two weeks' and no more time is granted to the respondents to file copy of postal receipt as proof of sending impugned notice to the petitioner by speed post and copy of e-mailed notice. Since the respondents are not filing proof of sending notice through speed post despite orders of this Court and today again two weeks' time has been sought to file it, therefore, as an interim measure, it is provided that impugned notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 issued by the respondent no.3 to the petitioner for the A.Y. 2014-15, shall remain stayed till the next date fixed. Put up as a fresh case before the appropriate Bench on 08.04.2022.\" Alongwith aforesaid second short counter affidavit, a certificate of Senior Superintendent of Post Office, Ghaziabad, Division, Ghaziabad, dated 30.04.2022 has been filed in which the postal department has certified that the article No. EU362756858IN was booked from Speed Post Center BNPL, Ghaziabad on 31.03.2021. The aforesaid article has been stated to be the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, issued to the petitioner on 31.03.2021. Alongwith earlier counter affidavit dated 24.03.2022 the respondents have filed copy of the track consignment report which shows that the aforesaid article has been delivered to the petitioner on 01.04.2021. Thus, the impugned notice under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 was issued to the petitioner on 31.03.2021 which is well within time. Consequently, the sole argument of learned counsel for the petitioner that the notice was issued beyond the period of limitation on 01.04.2021, is not sustainable and is, therefore, rejected. For the reasons aforestated, the writ petition is dismissed leaving it open for the petitioner to participate in the reassessment proceedings. Order Date :- 8.4.2022/vkg Digitally signed by VINOD KUMAR GOSWAMI Date: 2022.04.08 14:40:19 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad "