Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2021 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (7) TMI 1205 - HC - Income TaxReopening of assessment u/s 147 - re-assessment were passed within or beyond the period of limitation - Time limit for completion of assessment, reassessment and recomputation u/s 153 - interim order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court stating that the re-assessment order shall not be framed if not framed so far - Denial of natural justice - HELD THAT:- The knowledge or intimation to the competent authority through the respective learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties to the lis is one aspect of the matter, which can be construed as non-official communications and cannot be taken into account for the purpose of reckoning the period of limitation under the provisions of the Act. Only when an official communication is effected with the seal of the Court concerned, then alone the period of limitation should reckon and not otherwise. If this administrative procedure is not consistently followed, then there is a possibility that every litigant or the department would take undue advantage of any such unofficial communications, which would lead to confusion and chaos and the sanctity of the period of limitation contemplated is diluted. Therefore, knowledge and oral communications or private communications would not be taken into consideration for the purpose of reckoning the period of limitation as contemplated under the provisions of the statute and only if such communications are officially effected, the said point is to be taken into account for the purpose of reckoning the period of limitation.' On the issue in the matter of reckoning the period of limitation which would have the binding effect and therefore, as per the judgment of the Constitution Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi and others, [2017 (10) TMI 1276 - SUPREME COURT] the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India is to be followed as precedent. Moreover, in the case cited supra, the Hon'ble Apex Court, in clear terms, held that mere pronouncement of the order would not be sufficient. The order must be signed, sealed, dated and communicated to the parties, enabling them to understand the reasons and the spirit of the order. This being the principles to be followed, there is no reason whatsoever to accept the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner and the judgments relied on by the petitioner are of no avail, as the Hon'ble Apex Court, in clear terms, held the manner in which the period of limitation is to be reckoned. This being the factum established and principles to be followed, this Court has no hesitation in arriving a conclusion that the case of the petitioner deserves no appreciation. Principles of natural justice has been violated - It is not the case as if no opportunity was granted to the petitioner. Opportunity was given, but the petitioner has chosen to make a representation to the authorities that they are supposed to wait until the Hon'ble Supreme Court takes up his appeal for hearing. This Court is of the considered opinion that mere filing of an appeal before the High Court or Hon'ble Supreme Court would not preclude the competent authorities from exercising their powers, which is otherwise conferred under the provisions of the Act. Unless any interim order or otherwise is communicated to the authorities, they are bound to proceed under the provisions of the Act, in the manner known to law and therefore, mere filing of the case before the Hon'ble Supreme Court is not a ground to raise that the petitioner was not afforded with opportunity. Even, the petitioner has requested the authorities to wait. The petitioner has no right to make such a request to the Income Tax authorities, stating that they have preferred an appeal and therefore, they should not act under the provisions of the Act. The said submission deserves no merit consideration. The learned Standing Counsel, in this regard, made a submission that the SLP as per the petitioner, was filed on 08.10.2014 and it was taken up for hearing and an interim order was passed on 03.11.2014, after passing of an order of re-assessment by the competent authority on 21.10.2014. This apart, the petitioner has availed the opportunity and submitted their reply on 16.10.2014 and 20.10.2014. However, they made a request to stop all further proceedings till their appeal is taken up for hearing. This Court is of the considered opinion that the processes initiated under any statute need not be stalled unless there is an order from the competent higher authority or by the Court of law. Mere request in this regard is insufficient and if such a request is considered, the very spirit of the Act as well as the power of the authorities to continue the proceedings would be prejudiced and therefore, this Court is of an opinion that the opportunity provided by the respondent to the petitioner was not properly utilised, but they have utilised the same for the purpose of prolonging the proceedings. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the principles of natural justice has not been violated in this case, but the opportunities provided are not properly utilised by the petitioner, for which the respondent cannot be faulted. WP dismissed.
|