Sabita Patel V. ITO, Ward Bargarh & others

WP(C)/11008/2024

AI Insights

In this case, the petitioner, Sabita Patel, challenged the notices and the consequential order issued by the Income Tax Department under Sections 148 A (b) and 148 (d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The notices were issued on 15.03.2024 and 22.03.2024, respectively, and the order was passed on 30.03.2024. The petitioner contended that the notice issued on 22.03.2024 was received only on 27.03.2024, which did not provide the required seven days' clear time before the order was passed. The court, referencing a similar case from the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, found in favor of the petitioner, quashing the order due to procedural impropriety.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 811167 (HC-CUTTACK)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 02-05-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Baljeet Singh v. Income tax Officer and others
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: S C MOHANTY
• Assessee Lawyers: JAGABANDHU SAHOO; KAJAL SAHOO
• Keywords: Income Tax; Quash notice; Section 148 A (b); Section 148 (d); Seven days clear time
• Section: 148(d); 148(A)(b)

Judgement Text

" Page 1 of 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 11008 of 2024 Sabita Patel ….. Petitioner Mr. Jagabandhu Sahoo, Sr. Advocate along with Ms. Kajal Sahoo, Advocate Vs. ITO, Ward Bargarh & others ….. Opposite Parties Mr. S.C. Mohanty, Sr. Standing Counsel, Income Tax CORAM: DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI MR. JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY ORDER 02.05.2024 Order No. 01. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard Mr. Jagabandhu Sahoo, learned Senior Advocate appearing along with Ms. Kajal Sahoo, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.C. Mohanty, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department. 3. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking to quash the notice dated 15.03.2024 vide Annexure-4 and dated 22.03.2024 vide Annexure-6 issued under Section 148 A (b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and also the consequential order dated 30.03.2024 vide Annexure- 8 passed under Section 148 (d) of the said Act. 4. Mr. Jagabandhu Sahoo, learned Senior Advocate contended before this Court that the notice dated 22.03.2024 issued under Section 148 A (b) of the Act was received by the petitioner only on 27.03.2024 seeking reply by 29.03.2024. He also produced the postal tracking report to justify the fact that the item was delivered on 27.03.2024. According to him as per the requirement under Section 148 A (b) of the Act, clear seven days time period should have been given before passing the impugned order. But the impugned order was passed on Page 2 of 2 30.03.2024 under Annexure-8. Therefore, the same cannot be sustained in the eye of law. Reliance has been placed to the order passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, At-Chandigarh in the case of Baljeet Singh v. Income tax Officer and others, passed in CM No. 4931-CWP of 2023 in/and CWP No. 4818 of 2023 (O&M), The memo so filed in Court today be kept on record. 5. Mr. S.C. Mohanty, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department contended that the law is very clear to the extent that seven days’ clear time from the date of receipt of the notice ought to have been given to petitioner before passing the order. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view of the above fact, this Court is of the considered view that seven days clear time has not been given to the petitioner to place the documents, pursuant to the notice issued under Section 148 A (b) of the Income Tax Act. Therefore, the impugned order dated 30.03.2024 passed under Section 148 A (d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 under Anenxure-8 cannot be sustained in the eye of law and the same is liable to be quashed and is hereby quashed. However, liberty is granted to the opposite parties to proceed in accordance with law as per Section 148 A (b) of the Income Tax Act, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner. 7. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. Arun (DR. B.R. SARANGI) JUDGE (G. SATAPATHY) JUDGE Digitally Signed Signed by: ARUN KUMAR MISHRA Designation: ADR-cum-Addl. Principal Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 03-May-2024 12:26:07 Signature Not Verified "