TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 911X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se, on that ground also consequential proceedings, which is impugned herein is vitiated and it can be interfered with. Thus impugned order is hereby set aside. As a sequel, the impugned order is also set aside and the matter is remitted back to the respondent. While redoing the exercise, it is open to the respondent to issue a notice afresh u/s 148B giving not less than 7 days to the petitioner/assessee to respond and on receipt of the same, the petitioner shall respond by giving their reply or inputs within the time stipulated therein. - Writ Petition Nos.10045 And 10049 of 2022 And W.M.P.Nos.9749, 9750, 9754 And 9755 of 2022 - - - Dated:- 21-4-2022 - Honourable Mr. Justice R. Suresh Kumar For the Petitioner [in both petitions] ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Assessing Officer had proceeded to complete the enquiry and passing orders under Section 148A of the Act. By thus, an order has been passed on 31.03.2022 deciding that notice under Section 148A of the Act can be issued to the assessee. The said order passed under Section 148A of the Act deciding to issue notice under Section 148, dated 31.03.2022 is under Challenge in W.P.No.10045 of 2022. 7. As a sequel, on the same date i.e., 31.03.2022 notice under Section 148 was issued by the Revenue to the assessee, that is under challenge in W.P.No.10049 of 2022. 8. Assailing the said order in the first writ petition i.e., order passed under Section 148A of the Act, Mrs.Aparna Nandakumar, learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that, tho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... artment, which alone could be relied upon by the Assessing Authority before finalizing any decision, therefore the request letter claimed to have been made by the petitioner/assessee seeking two weeks further time dated 25.03.2022 since admittedly has been made only through RPAD, the same could not have reached the Appellate Authority or if it could have been reached, the same could not have been relied upon by the Appellate Authority before passing any order invoking Section 148A of the Act, that is how the present impugned order has been passed. Therefore, in this context, it cannot be blamed that the procedure in principle of natural justice is violated in this case. In view of the same, the impugned order is sustained, she contended. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ub-Section (b) of Section 148 makes it clear that while serving a notice on the assessee to show cause, even such time may be specified in the notice being not less than 7 days and not exceeding 30 days from the date on which the said notice is issued. Therefore, sub- Section(b) of Section 148 contemplates that, a minimum of 7 days notice must be given. 15. Herein a case in hand, notice dated 17.03.2022 was issued giving time upto 21.03.2022 therefore, the minimum 7 days since has not been given in this case, on that ground also consequential proceedings, which is impugned herein is vitiated and it can be interfered with. 16. In that view of the matter, this Court is inclined to dispose of these writ petitions with the following order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
