H.P.STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD V. UNION OF INDIA

CWP/5118/2011

AI Insights

The case involves multiple civil writ petitions filed by Tibetan Children’s Village and H.P. State Pollution Control Board against various income tax authorities. The petitions challenged the notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, which were procedural steps in tax reassessment. The main legal contention revolved around the validity and implications of these notices. However, by the time of the hearing, the assessments based on these notices had been completed, rendering the petitions infructuous. The court's decision emphasized that the petitioners could still contest the assessment orders through appropriate legal channels.

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 725258 (HC-HIMACHAL_PRADESH)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 23-03-2012
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: P P CHAUHAN; VANDANA KUTHIALA
• Assessee Lawyers: M M KHANNA; VAYUR GAUTAM; AJAY VAIDYA
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Income Tax; Infructuous; Notices
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

" IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No.: 11200 of 2011-J with CWP No.11288 of 2011-I and CWP Nos.5117 & 5118 of 2010. Decided on: 23.03.2012. _______________________________________________________ 1. CWP No.11200 of 2011-J. Tibetan Children’s Village, Dharamshala Cantt., District Kangra – 176 216 (H.P.) through its President Mr. Tsewang Yeshi. … Petitioner. Versus 1. Income Tax Officer, Dharamshala, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh. 2. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Railway Board Building, Shimla, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh. … Respondents. 2. CWP No.11288 of 2011-I. Tibetan Children’s Village, Dharamshala Cantt., District Kangra – 176 216 (H.P.) through its President Mr. Tsewang Yeshi. … Petitioner. Versus 3. Income Tax Officer, Dharamshala, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh. 4. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Railway Board Building, Shimla, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh. … Respondents. 3. CWP No.5117 of 2011. H.P. State Pollution Control Board, Him Parivesh, Phase-III, BCS, New Shimla, District Shimla, through its Member Secretary. … Petitioner. Versus - 2 - 1. Union of India, through Secretary (Finance) to the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, North Block, New Delhi. 2. Central Board of Direct Taxes, North Block, New Delhi – 110021 through its Chairman. 3. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Railway Board Building, The Mall, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh. 4. Commissioner of Income Tax, Railway Board Building, The Mall, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh. 5. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle, Railway Board Building, The Mall, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh. … Respondents. 4. CWP No.5118 of 2011. H.P. State Pollution Control Board, Him Parivesh, Phase-III, BCS, New Shimla, District Shimla, through its Member Secretary. … Petitioner. Versus 1. Union of India, through Secretary (Finance) to the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, North Block, New Delhi. 2. Central Board of Direct Taxes, North Block, New Delhi – 110021 through its Chairman. 3. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Railway Board Building, The Mall, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh. 4. Commissioner of Income Tax, Railway Board Building, The Mall, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh. 5. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle, Railway Board Building, The Mall, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh. … Respondents. Civil Writ Petitions under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of writ of Certiorari and Mandamus, order or direction to the respondents. - 3 - Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.B. Misra, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice, Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. M.M. Khanna, Senior Advocate with Mr. Vayur Gautam, Advocate for the petitioner(s) in CWP Nos. 11200 of 2011 and 11288 of 2011. Mr. Ajay Vaidya, Advocate for the petitioner(s) in CWP Nos. 5117 and 5118 of 2010. For the Respondents : Mr. P.P. Chauhan, Central Government Counsel for respondents No.1 and 2 in CWP Nos. 5117 and 5118 of 2010. Ms. Vandana Kuthiala, Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2 in CWP Nos. 11200 and 11288 of 2011 and for respondents No.3 to 5 in CWP Nos.5117 and 5118 of 2010. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral): Petitioners have challenged the issuance of notices dated 29.10.2010 (in CWP Nos. 11200 and 11288 of 2011 – Annexure P-3) and 4.3.2011 (in CWP No.5117 and 5118 of 2011 – Annexure P-6) respectively, issued to them under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act. Ms. Vandana Kuthiala, Advocate has informed the Court at bar that in sequel to the notices issued vide 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? - 4 - Annexures P-3 and P-6, the assessment order has already been made. Consequently, the present petitions are rendered infructuous and the same are dismissed having become infructuous, so also the pending application(s), if any. However, it will be open to the present petitioners to assail the assessment order in accordance with law, if not already challenged. No costs. (Justice R.B. Misra), Judge. (Justice Rajiv Sharma), Judge. March 23, 2012. (sck). "