SINGLA RICE OIL AND GENERAL MILLS V. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS

CWP/5307/2022

AI Insights

The case involves Singla Rice Oil and General Mills challenging notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Union of India. The core issue revolved around the validity of these notices, particularly concerning their issuance and the procedural compliance required under the law. The Delhi High Court's categorization of similar cases post the Supreme Court's decision in Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal was pivotal. The court's decision referenced this categorization to determine the fate of the notices issued to the petitioner, focusing on the correct procedural adherence in issuing such notices.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 725649 (HC-CHANDIGARH)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 20-11-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Suman Jeet Agarwal vs. Income Tax officer, Ward 61 (1) and others, Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act of 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: GAURI RAMPAL
• Assessee Lawyers: ASHISH JHAMB
• Keywords: Digital Signature; E-Filing Portal; Notice under section 148; Reassessment proceedings; Show cause notices
• Section: 148; 148A(b); 148A(d); 148A; 148A(a)

Judgement Text

"103 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Singla Rice Oil and General Mills Union of India and others CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE M Present: Mr. Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal, (through video conferencing). SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) 1. Learned counsel for the parties are ad instructions received from the department that the case may be disposed of in terms of Category ‘C’ of the judgment Court in Suman Jeet Agarwal vs. Income Tax officer, Ward 61 (1) and others WP(C) No.10/2022 2. After the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India v. Ash categories of cases were noticed by the Delhi High Court and the same are as under:- “30. Additionally, it is a settled position of law that the notice under Section 148 of the Act of 1961 must be served in accordance with the procedure established by law, to the correct addressee, otherwise the reassessment proceedings would be IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP Date of Decision: 20.11.2024 Singla Rice Oil and General Mills Vs. Union of India and others HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Mr. Ashish Jhamb, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal, Sr. Standing Counsel (through video conferencing). *** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) Learned counsel for the parties are ad instructions received from the department that the case may be disposed of in terms of Category ‘C’ of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Suman Jeet Agarwal vs. Income Tax officer, Ward 61 (1) and others WP(C) No.10/2022 and connected cases, decide After the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal, 2022 categories of cases were noticed by the Delhi High Court and the same are as “30. Additionally, it is a settled position of law that the notice under Section 148 of the Act of 1961 must be served in accordance with the procedure established by law, to the correct addressee, otherwise the reassessment proceedings would be IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-5307-2022 (O&M) Date of Decision: 20.11.2024 …Petitioner …Respondents HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA SANJAY VASHISTH , Advocate for the petitioner. Sr. Standing Counsel for the revenue. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) Learned counsel for the parties are ad-idem and as per instructions received from the department that the case may be disposed of in passed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Suman Jeet Agarwal vs. Income Tax officer, Ward 61 (1) and and connected cases, decided on 27.09.2022. After the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in ish Agarwal, 2022 2022 (7) Scale 226, several categories of cases were noticed by the Delhi High Court and the same are as “30. Additionally, it is a settled position of law that the notice under Section 148 of the Act of 1961 must be served in accordance with the procedure established by law, to the correct addressee, otherwise the reassessment proceedings would be idem and as per instructions received from the department that the case may be disposed of in passed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Suman Jeet Agarwal vs. Income Tax officer, Ward 61 (1) and After the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in , several categories of cases were noticed by the Delhi High Court and the same are as “30. Additionally, it is a settled position of law that the notice under Section 148 of the Act of 1961 must be served in accordance with the procedure established by law, to the correct addressee, otherwise the reassessment proceedings would be RAJESH KUMAR 2024.11.25 14:52 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-5307-2022 (O&M) [2] invalid in law. [Commissioner of Income -Tax (Central) - I v. Chetan Gupta (Supra)] The issuance of e-mail attaching electronic notice to an unrelated e-mail address does not constitute as due despatch and therefore, the Notices cannot be said to have been issued on 31st March, 2021. However, in each of these matters, since an authenticated copy of the notice was placed on the registered account of the assessee on the E-filing portal, as that is how the petitioners learnt about the notices, these notices will be held to have been issued on the date on which the Notices were first viewed by the assessees on their E- filing portal. 31. For the reasons and principles that we have laid down, we dispose of these Writ Petitions with the following directions: 31.1. Category ‘A’: The Notices falling under category ‘A’, which were digitally signed on or after 1st of April, 2021, are held to bear the date on which the said Notices were digitally signed and not 31st March 2021. The said petitions are disposed of with the direction that the said Notices are to be considered as show-cause-notices under Section 148A (b) of the Act as per the directions of the apex Court in the Ashish Agarwal (Supra) judgment. 31.2. Category ‘B’: The Notices falling under category ‘B’ which were sent through the registered e-mail ID of the respective JAOs, though not digitally signed are held to be valid. The said petitions are disposed of with the direction to the JAOs to verify and determine the date and time of its despatch as recorded in the ITBA portal in accordance with the law laid RAJESH KUMAR 2024.11.25 14:52 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-5307-2022 (O&M) [3] down in this judgment as the date of issuance. If the date and time of despatch recorded is on or after 1st of April, 2021, the Notices are to be considered as show-cause-notices under Section 148A (b) as per the directions of the apex Court in the Ashish Agarwal (Supra) judgment. 31.3. Category ‘C’: The petitions challenging Notices falling under category ‘C’ which were digitally signed on 31st of March 2021, are disposed of with the direction to the JAOs to verify and determine the date and time of despatch as recorded in the ITBA portal in accordance with the law laid down in this judgment as the date of issuance. If the date and time of despatch recorded is on or after 1st of April, 2021, the Notices are to be considered as show-cause-notices under Section 148A (b) as per the directions of the apex Court in the Ashish Agarwal (Supra) judgment. 31.4. Category ‘D’: The petitions challenging Notices falling under category ‘D’ which were only uploaded in the E-filing portal of the assessees without any real time alert, are disposed of with the direction to the JAOs to determine the date and time when the assessees viewed the Notices in the E-filing portal, as recorded in the ITBA portal and conclude such date as the date of issuance in accordance with the law laid down in this judgment. If such date of issuance is determined to be on or after 1st of April 2021, the Notices will be construed as issued under Section 148A (b) of the Act of 1961 as per the Ashish Agarwal (Supra) judgment. RAJESH KUMAR 2024.11.25 14:52 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-5307-2022 (O&M) [4] 31.5. Category ‘E’: The petitions challenging Notices falling under category ‘E’ which were manually despatched, are disposed of with the direction to the JAOs to determine in accordance with the law laid down in this judgment, the date and time when the Notices were delivered to the post office for despatch and consider the same as date of issuance. If the date and time of despatch recorded is on or after 1st of April, 2021, the Notices are to be construed as show-cause-notices under Section 148A (b) as per the directions of the apex Court in the Ashish Agarwal (Supra) judgment. 31.6. Notices sent to unrelated e-mail addresses: The petitions challenging Notices which were sent to unrelated e-mail addresses are disposed of with the direction the JAOs to verify the date on which the Notice was first viewed by the assessee on the E-filing portal and consider the same as the date of issuance. If such date of issuance is determined to be on or after 01st April, 2021, the Notices will be construed as issued under Section 148A (b) of the Act of 1961 as per judgment in Ashish Agarwal (Supra). 31.7. We may note that in the writ petitions, the petitioners have raised additional defenses to challenge the impugned Notices. Such additional defenses have not been considered by this Court and the petitioners shall be at liberty to raise all such additional defenses as available in law. 31.8. We are conscious that the time granted by the Supreme Court in Ashish Agarwal to the Department has since expired on 3rd June, 2022 however, the proceedings in the present writ RAJESH KUMAR 2024.11.25 14:52 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-5307-2022 (O&M) [5] petitions were stayed on 24th March, 2022 until the pronouncement of this judgment. Therefore, we grant the JAOs in the first instance eight (8) weeks time from today to determine the date of issuance of the Notices as per the law laid down in this judgment. 31.9. The Notices which in accordance with the law laid down in this judgment has been verified by the JAOs to have been issued on or after 1st April 2021 and until 30th June, 2021 shall be deemed to have been issued under Section 148A of the Act of 1961 as substituted by the Finance Act, 2021 and construed to be show-cause notices in terms of Section 148A(b) as per the judgment of the apex Court in Ashish Agarwal (Supra) and the JAOs shall thereafter follow the procedure set down by the Supreme Court in the said judgment which reads as follows: “26. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, the present Appeals are ALLOWED IN PART. The impugned common judgments and orders passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in W.T. No. 524/2021 and other allied tax appeals/petitions, is/are hereby modified and substituted as under : - (i) The impugned section 148 notices issued to the respective assessees which were issued under unamended section 148 of the IT Act, which were the subject matter of writ petitions before the various respective High Courts shall be deemed to have been issued under section 148A of the IT Act as substituted by the Finance Act, 2021 and construed or treated to be show-cause notices in terms of RAJESH KUMAR 2024.11.25 14:52 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-5307-2022 (O&M) [6] section 148A(b). The assessing officer shall, within thirty days from today provide to the respective assessees information and material relied upon by the Revenue, so that the assesees can reply to the show-cause notices within two weeks thereafter; (ii) The requirement of conducting any enquiry, if required, with the prior approval of specified authority under section 148A(a) is hereby dispensed with as a one- time measure vis-à-vis those notices which have been issued under section 148 of the unamended Act from 1-4- 2021 till date, including those which have been quashed by the High Courts. Even otherwise as observed hereinabove holding any enquiry with the prior approval of specified authority is not mandatory but it is for the concerned Assessing Officers to hold any enquiry, if required; (iii) The assessing officers shall thereafter pass orders in terms of section 148A(d) in respect of each of the concerned assessees; Thereafter after following the procedure as required under section 148A may issue notice under section 148 (as substituted); (iv) All defences which may be available to the assesses including those available under section 149 of the IT Act and all rights and contentions which may be available to the concerned assessees and Revenue under the Finance Act, 2021 and in law shall continue to be available” RAJESH KUMAR 2024.11.25 14:52 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-5307-2022 (O&M) [7] 3. The case of the petitioner admittedly falls in category ‘C’ as noticed above. 4. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of with the directions as held (supra). 5. All pending misc. application(s) also stand disposed of. (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE 20.11.2024 rajesh 1. Whether speaking/reasoned? : Yes/No 2. Whether reportable? : Yes/No RAJESH KUMAR 2024.11.25 14:52 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. "