SALONI NARANG V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-15,

W.P.(C)/5953/2015

AI Insights

The case involves multiple writ petitions filed by Saloninarang and Harshit Tripathi against the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-15, challenging notices issued under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. These notices were issued for the assessment years 2007-08 to 2011-12, and the petitioners sought to stay these notices until the disposal of their first appeals, which were pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XXVI, New Delhi. The court, however, decided not to interfere at this preliminary stage, emphasizing that the petitioners could avail themselves of the statutory remedies available under the Act after the issuance of any adverse orders.

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 752040 (HC-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 10-06-2015
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: SURUCHI AGGARWAL; ABHISHEK SHARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: BHARAT BERIWAL
• Keywords: Assessment orders; Income Tax; Penalty proceedings; Writ petition
• Section: 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

"$-17 to 23. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5950/2015 SALONINARANG Petitioner Througii: Mr. Bharat Beriwal, Advocate. versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-15, Respondent Through: Mr. Suruchi Aggarwal, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Advocate. WITH + W.P.(C) 5951/2015 SALONINARANG Petitioner Through: Mr. Bharat Beriwal, Advocate. versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-15, Respondent Through: Mr. Suruchi Aggarwal, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Advocate. W.P.(C)Nos. 5950, 5951, 5952, 5953, 5954, 5955& 5956of2015 Page 1 of6 Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Signature Not Verified o WITH + W.P.(C) 5952/2015 SALONINARANG Petitioner Through: Mr. Bharat Beriwal, Advocate. versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-15, Respondent Through: Mr. Suruchi Aggarwal, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Advocate. WITH + W.P.(C) 5953/2015 SALONINARANG Petitioner Through: Mr. Bharat Beriwal, Advocate. versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-15, Respondent Through: Mr. Suruchi Aggarwal, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Advocate. WITH W.P.(C) Nos. 5950, 5951, 5952, 5953, 5954, 5955 & 5956 of2015 Page 2 of6 ^1? + W.P.(C) 5954/2015 SALONINARANG Petitioner Through: Mr. Bharat Beriwal, Advocate. versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-15, Respondent Through: Mr. Suruchi Aggarwal, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Advocate. WITH + 5955/2015 SALONINARANG Petitioner Through: Mr. Bharat Beriwal, Advocate. versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-15, Respondent Through: Mr. Suruchi Aggarwal, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Advocate. AND + W.P.(C) 5956/2015 HARSHIT TRIPATHI Petitioner Through: Mr. Bharat Beriwal, Advocate. W.P.(Q Nos. 5950, 5951, 5952, 5953, 5954, 5955 & 5956 of2015 Page 3 of6 -i' ) versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-15, Respondent Through: Mr. Suruchi Aggarwal, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA ORDER % 10.06.2015 CM APPL Nos. 10783/2015.10785/2015.10787/2015.10789/2015, 10791/2015.10793/2015 & 10795/2015 1. Exemptions allowedsubjectto all just exemptions. 2. The applications stand disposed of. W.P.(C) 5950/2015 & CM APPL 10782/2015 (for stay) W.P.(C^ 5951/2015 & CM APPL 10784/2015 (for stay) W.P.(C) 5952/2015 & CM APPL 10786/2015 (for stay) W.P.(C) 5953/2015 & CM APPL 10788/2015 (for stay) W.P.(C) 5954/2015 & CM APPL 10790/2015 (for stay) W.P.(C) 5955/2015 & CM APPL 10792/2015 (for stay) W.P.(C) 5956/2015 & CM APPL 10794/2015 (for stay) 3. The prayer in these writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is that the Court should stay the operation of W.R(C) Nos. 5950, 5951, 5952, 5953, 5954, 5955 & 5956 of2015 Page 4 of6 two notices dated 05^^ March, 2014 and 14^^ May, 2014 issued by the Respondent under Section 271 (1) (c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act') inrelation to Assessment year 2007-08 till 2011-2012 till the disposal of the first appeals preferred by the Petitioner against the Assessment Orders for those years, which are pending before the CommissionerofIncomeTax (Appeals)-XXVI,New Delhi. 4. At the outset, the Court put a query to learned counsel for the Petitioner, whether inrespect of an order passed against thePetitioner pursuant to the impugned notices, the Petitioner would have a statutory remedy of appeal under the Act? Learned counsel for the Petitioner answered in affirmative but insisted that the Petitioner has a right to file awrit petition tochallenge the impugned notices. 5. The Court is notpersuaded to interfere in the matter at this stage when only notices have been issued to the Petitioner pursuant to the statutory powers of the Respondents. In other words, there is no statutory bar to penalty proceedings being initiated against the Petitioner. In the event any adverse order is passed against the Petitioner, shecanavail the remedies available to her under the Actin W.P.(C) Nos. 5950, 5951, 5952, 5953, 5954, 5955 &5956 of2015 Page5of6 accordance with law, urging all the grounds that may be available to her, including those raised in the present petitions. 6. The petitions andthe applications are accordingly dismissed. JUNE 10,2015/gb S.MURALIDHAR (Vacation Judge) L^ak«EHTA ication Judge) W.P.(C) Nos. 5950, 5951, 5952, 5953, 5954, 5955 & 5956 of2015 Page 6 of6 "