Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2023 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (3) TMI 1054 - HC - Income TaxDelay uploading the assessment order or generating the DIN - Assessment barred by the limitation period provided under Section 153(3) - specific case of the petitioner is that during the pendency of the writ petition, the order of assessment was uploaded on the web portal of the petitioner assessee which was not communicated through e mail address of the assessee - mandation to quote DIN number with regard to every communication made by the Revenue to the assessee - HELD THAT:- In the case at hand, the order sheet at Annexure B to the supplementary affidavit of the revenue dated 07.12.2022, shows that the assessment order was made/generated on 31.03.2022 and the intimation letter was issued on 03.04.2022. Therefore, the contention of the petitioner, that the said assessment order, dated 31.03.2022 which was uploaded on the web portal on 01.04.2022 and communicated to the petitioner on 03.04.2022 is barred by limitation, is misconceived and not sustainable in law , inasmuch as, section 153 (3) controls only making of order. There is no restriction or limitation period prescribed under Section 153 (3) for ‘issue of order’, ‘uploading of order on web portal’ or ‘communication of order In the present case the assessment order, dated 31.03.2022, was upload ed on web portal on 01.04.2022, which is just the next day after 31.03.2022, and even the DIN was generated on 01.04.2022. Accordingly, the delay, if any, in uploading or DIN was just of one day. The legislature itself has given stricter time line for Section 153 (1) and Section 153 (2) and has give n a liberal time line for Section 153 (3). Thus it may not be correct to apply the time line provided under Section 153 (3) strictly or as mandatory as compared to the time line provided under Section 153 (1) and Section 153 (2). Both Section 153 (1) and Section 153 (2) provide for the consequence that after the expiry of time line “no assessment order shall be passed”. However, Section 153 (3) does not provide for any such consequence. Accordingly, in the present case, the delay, if any, of just one day in uploading the assessment order or generating the DIN cannot make the assessment order unsustainable in law. Petitioner has also contended that the assessment order, dated 31.03.2022, was uploaded on the next day i.e. 01.04.2022 but the same was required in law to be uploaded on the same date and not later. However, the Petitioner has not shown any provision of law which provides that an assessment order has to be uploaded on the web portal on the same d ay when it is made and the assessment order will become invalid if the same is uploaded on the next day. In the absence of such legal provision, it cannot be held that the assessment order, dated 31.03.2022, which was uploaded on 01.04.2022, is invalid in law. Different expression used by the legislature at different places has certainly a different objective. Making of the order and communication of the order are two different things. Even the circular stipulates communication of the order and not making of the order as it says every communication relating to assessment, appeal, order etc. shall have a DIN on the body of the order . Petitioner has contended that impugned order is antedated. It is a purely factual issue also disputed by the revenue. As such, the petitioner has a statutory alternate remedy to challenge the assessment order before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) where he may raise such plea . The instant writ application is dismissed Petitioner has failed to satisfy any of grounds to invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court by passing the statutory alternative remedy.
|