M/s.SD Infra V. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax

WP(MD)/9249/2024

AI Insights

The case involves M/S SD Infra, which challenged an order dated 15.03.2024 that sought to attach its bank account following an adverse assessment order for the year 2017-2018. The assessment was initially completed in 2019 but was reopened in 2023, leading to the disputed order. The petitioner argued that the order for bank attachment was issued without notice and contested the tax imposition based on transactions post-demonetization. The respondents defended the action by stating that the petitioner did not seek a stay on the assessment order or file an application under Section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act, which left them no choice but to proceed with the attachment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 747253 (HC-MISC)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 15-04-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and others vs. L.G. Electronics India Private Limited
• Laws Referred To: Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: N DILIP KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: A S SRIRAMAN
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Bank Account Attachment; Income Tax; Writ of Certiorari
• Section: 119; 220(6)

Judgement Text

"W.P.(MD) Nos.9249 and 9250 of 2024 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 15.04.2024 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN W.P.(MD) Nos.9249 and 9250 of 2024 and W.M.P.(MD) Nos.8420, 8423, 8425, 8421, 8424 and 8426 of 2024 M/S.SD Infra represented by its Partner, No.25, IAS.Nagar, Thiruverumbur, Trichy 620 013. ... Petitioner in both W.Ps., /vs./ 1.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -1(1), Trichy, Income Tax Department, Williams Road, Cantonment, Trichy 620001. 2.The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai -1, Income Tax Department, 2, VP Rathinasamy Nadar Road, Bibikulam, Madurai 625 002. 1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) Nos.9249 and 9250 of 2024 3.The National Faceless Appeal Centre, C-Block, 4th Floor, SPM. Civic Centre, New Delhi 110 001. ... Respondents in both W.Ps., COMMON PRAYER: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records of the writ petitioner/Assessee on the file of the 1st respondent to quash the impugned order 15.03.2024 in DIN and Letter Nos.ITBA /COM /F/17/ 2023-24/1062675769(1) and ITBA /COM /F/17/ 2023-24/1062678463(1). For Petitioner in both W.Ps., : Mr.A.S.Sriraman For R1 & R2 in both W.Ps., : Mr.N.Dilip Kumar Standing Counsel COMMON ORDER Heard Mr.A.S.Sriraman, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.N.Dilip Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 2.The petitioner has challenged the order dated 15.03.2024 seeking to attach the bank account of the petitioner pursuant to the adverse order passed by the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2017-2018 on 26.05.2023. 2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) Nos.9249 and 9250 of 2024 3.Earlier, the assessment was completed on 27.12.2019. Thereafter, the assessment was re-opened and an assessment order came to be passed on 26.05.2023. The petitioner filed appeals before the third respondent on 14.06.2023. 4.It is the case of the petitioner that without issuance of notice, the impugned bank attachment order has been passed. On merits, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is engaged in manufacture and sale of ready mix concrete, in sale of petroleum products and is running a petrol bunk. 5.It is submitted that the amounts were withdrawn and deposited after demonetization and therefore, he would submit that the respondents have wrongly imposed taxes, vide the demand notice dated 26.05.2023. 6.The notice is defended by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents 1 and 2 on the ground that the petitioner has neither filed an 3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) Nos.9249 and 9250 of 2024 application under Section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act before the Assessing Officer not to treat the petitioner as an assessee or filed an application to stay the operation of the assessment order dated 26.05.2023 before the Appellate Commissioner. 7.It is submitted that in the absence of either of the steps taken by the petitioner, the respondent was left with no other option except to proceed against the petitioner by attaching the petitioner's bank account. It is therefore submitted that the impugned order does not warrant any interference. 8.I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents 1 and 2. 9.There are guidelines issued by the Board under Section 119 of the Income Tax Act, which warrants deposit of Rs.20% of the disputed tax pending appeal. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has also dealt with the issue in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and others vs. L.G. Electronics India Private Limited, reported in 2018 (18) SCC 447 and held that in fit cases, the Authorities 4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) Nos.9249 and 9250 of 2024 can waive the amounts provided applications are made. In this case, admittedly, the petitioner has neither filed a petition under Section 220 (6) of the Income Tax Act before the Assessing Officer or filed a stay petition before the Appellate Authority. The petitioner may have a case on merits. 10.Considering the same, this Court is inclined to grant temporary reprieve to the petitioner by giving 30 days time from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The respondents are directed to keep the impugned attachment order in abeyance subject to the petitioner's opting to file either the petition for stay before the Appellate Authority or for appropriate orders under Section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act before the Assessing Officer. If such an application is filed either before the Assessing Officer or before the Appellate Commissioner as the case may be, the same shall be disposed of within a period of four weeks thereafter. The Appellate Authority may endeavour to dispose of the appeal as expeditiously as possible. 5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) Nos.9249 and 9250 of 2024 11.With the above directions, these Writ Petitions stand disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. Index : Yes / No 15.04.2024 Internet : Yes / No mm 6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) Nos.9249 and 9250 of 2024 C.SARAVANAN, J. mm W.P.(MD) Nos.9249 and 9250 of 2024 15.04.2024 7/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis "