Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2023 (1) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (1) TMI 537 - HC - Income TaxReopening of assessment u/s 147 - Section 148A of IT Act kicked in on and from 01.04.2021 vide Finance Act, 2021, a notice u/s 148A(b) was issued - first respondent called upon the writ petitioner-assessee to file objections for the purpose of legal drill under Section 148A(d) - As argued Dissemination Note between the authorities of the Department i.e., inter se department wrongly refers to cash deposits as Rs.169921/- lakhs instead of Rs.1,699.21 lakhs - HELD THAT:- The letter of the Additional Commissioner dated 21.07.2022, it is clearly an inter-office communication where the Additional Commissioner has written to the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, who admittedly is the 'Specified Authority' within the meaning of Section 148A(d) read with Section 151 of IT Act. Therefore, this 21.07.2022 letter is not from the 'Specified Authority' and it is an inter-office mail. The Specified Authority on 30.07.2022 has clearly opined that it is a fit case for issuing notice under Section 148. That puts an end to the argument predicated on the letter dated 21.07.2022 from the Additional Commissioner to the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax. Writ petitioner submitted that once the order is made and once Section 148 legal drill is carried to its logical end, if it goes against the writ petitioner, the writ petitioner will have to make 20% deposit for stay. This Court refrains itself from expressing any opinion on this aspect of the matter as it is premature and as rightly pointed out by learned Revenue counsel, it is in the realm of surmises and conjectures and in any event, this submission does not persuade this Court to interfere at this stage. The argument that post logical end of Section 148 legal drill if the writ petitioner comes to this Court alternate remedy rule will be put against the writ petitioner is going beyond the realm of surmises and conjectures also. It all has to be dealt with on a case to case basis and it is clearly premature to interfere at this stage. This Court is of the considered view that Section 148A is a codified mechanism that has been put in place for the benefit of the assessee and if that is stretched to the levels to which the writ petitioner wants to carry the matter, the very objective of a pre-notice drill qua Section 148 read with section 147 will become counter productive. In the light of the discussion and dispositive reasoning thus far, this Court is not inclined to interfere qua impugned order and impugned notice, both dated 31.07.2022. Before concluding, though obvious it is made clear that Section 148 legal drill shall proceed without being impeded by this order and it will not in any manner serve as impetus either.Sequitur is captioned writ petition fails and the same is dismissed.
|