VANDANA BANSAL AND 10 OTHERS V. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND 2 OTHERS

WTAX/290/2019

AI Insights

The case involves Vandana Bansal and 10 others as petitioners, who sought to quash an order and a garnishee notice issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Allahabad. The petitioners had previously undergone a search and seizure, leading to proceedings under Sections 153A/153C of the Income Tax Act. They filed for a settlement under Section 245C, depositing a significant amount against their tax liability. However, the Income Tax Settlement Commission passed an order without specifying the terms of settlement, leading to further actions by the assessing authority. The Supreme Court had earlier acknowledged the financial difficulties of the petitioners and directed no further payments until a certain date, which was not adhered to by the assessing authority. The High Court, after hearing the arguments, decided to expedite the appeal process without any coercive actions until the appeal's decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 768784 (HC-ALLAHABAD)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 14-03-2019
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: SSC; PRAVIN KUMAR; SANJAY SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: TARUN AGRAWAL; RAVI KANT
• Keywords: Coercive Action; Financial crunch; Garnishee notice; Search and seizure; Settlement of Cases; Writ of Certiorari
• Section: 153A; 153C; 153B; 245C; 226(3); 245HA(1)(iiia); 245HA(2)

Judgement Text

"Court No. - 21 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 290 of 2019 Petitioner :- Vandana Bansal And 10 Others Respondent :- The Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Tarun Agrawal Counsel for Respondent :- S.S.C. Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J. Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J. Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks leave of the Court to implead Income Tax Appellate Tribunal as one of the respondent. Leave is granted. Necessary correction, in the memo of parties, be carried out during the course of the day. The petitioners have preferred this writ petition for issuance of a writ of certiorari to quash the order dated 06.02.2019 passed by the respondent no. 1 and garnishee notice dated 27.02.2019 issued by the same respondent-Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle, Allahabad, whereby he has issued a notice under Section 226 Sub Section 3 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the attachment of the petitioners' account in the Punjab National Bank. Brief facts are these: Pursuant to search and seizure conducted on the premises of the petitioners the assessing authority initiated proceedings under Section 153A/153C against the petitioners for different assessment year. The petitioners moved an application under Section 245C for settlement of the cases. It is stated that petitioners deposited Rs. 3,66,48,565/- against their tax liability. The Income Tax Settlement Commission passed an order by invoking clause (iiia) of Sub Section (1) of Section 245HA of the Income Tax Act. It is averred that Income Tax Settlement Commission has passed the order without providing terms and conditions of settlement. In pursuance thereof the assessing authority again seized of the matter. It is urged by Sri Ravi Kant, learned Senior Advocate that in view of the abatement, now the time limit in terms of the provision of Sub Section (2) of Section 245HA read with Section 153B expired in all cases of the petitioner. The proceeding for the assessment has already become barred. It is also brought to our notice that the Supreme Court in its order dated 16.04.2018 has noticed the fact that the petitioner has paid 3.94 crores and earlier also he has deposited 3.66 crores rupees. The Court has also noticed the financial crunch which the petitioners are facing. Accordingly, the Court has directed that no further payment shall be made by the petitioners till June, 2018 and a direction was issued to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to decide the appeal. We have heard Sri Ravi Kant, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Tarun Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Pravin Kumar, learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 and 2 and newly added respondent no. 4, and Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no. 3. With the consent of the parties, the writ petition is taken on the board and is finally disposed of in terms of the rule of the Court. In view of the above, we direct the Appellate Authority to decide the appeal expeditiously, preferably within three months from the date of communication of the order. It is made clear that we have not expressed our view on the merits of the case. The Appellate Authority will decide the appeal in accordance with law. The learned counsel for the petitioner assured the Court that no unnecessary adjournment will be sought on behalf of petitioners. It is contended on behalf of petitioners that the petitioners have already deposited about 7 crores, which has been taken note by the Supreme Court in its interim order. In view of the above, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners till the appeal is decided. Order Date :- 14.3.2019 SR "