Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2023 (2) TMI 1134

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rt would not go into the disputed questions of facts pertaining to valuation of the land or the nature of the land. As decided by SC in Anshul Jain [ 2022 (10) TMI 3 - SC ORDER] What is challenged before the High Court was the re-opening notice under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The notices have been issued, after considering the objections raised by the petitioner. If the petitioner has any grievance on merits thereafter, the same has to be agitated before the Assessing Officer in the re-assessment proceedings. Under the circumstances, the High Court has rightly dismissed the writ petition. In view of above settled legal position, in the factual premise of the case, which has led to passing of the impugned order unde .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 148 of the IT Act. At the outset, we find that the petitioner has not alleged procedural impropriety, irregularities or violation of statutory provisions in the matter of initiation of proceedings or passing of the order under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act. Moreover, there is no allegation that his reply was not considered or opportunity of hearing was not afforded to him. It appears that the department received information that the value of land, which was subject matter of transaction of sale, was far more than what has been disclosed. Therefore, on the face of it, it appears to be a case where the department has collected certain information regarding certain income having escaped assessment. Whether or not, the information .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ion to question the assessment otherwise than by the use of this machinery is incompatible with the scheme of the Act. The challenge of the action of the Income-Tax Officer by a writ prohibition or mandamus is , therefore, not available to the assessee. 5. In 'Rasulji Buxji Kathawala vs. Income Tax Commissioner, Delhi and another' (Civil Writ No. 44 of 1955, D/d. 2.4.1956) while dealing with the similar situation under the 1922 Act, Division Bench of Rajasthan High Court held that- But where as in this case no part of the Act is being attacked, there is, in our opinion, no justification for us to intervene at this stage when other remedies which arc not necessarily onerous are still open to the applicant under the Act. We, t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n 147 of the Act or the order(s) rejecting the objections, is made out at this premature stage. 7. Delhi High Court in W.P.(C) 5787/2022 titled as Gulmuhar Silk Pvt. Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 10(3) Delhi, while considering the same question held that: 6. Though it is the petitioner's case that the impugned order is erroneous on facts, yet this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner would have ample opportunity during the course of proceedings before different statutory forums to show that the finding of fact arrived at was erroneous. Moreover, at this stage, no assessment order has been passed and it has only been observed that it is a fit case for issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act. In fact, the Supreme .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... istent view is that where the proceedings have not even been concluded by the statutory authority, the writ Court should not interfere at such a premature stage. Moreover it is not a case where from bare reading of notice it can be axiomatically held that the authority has clutched upon the jurisdiction not vested in it. The correctness of order under Section 148A(d) is being challenged on the factual premise contending that jurisdiction though vested has been wrongly exercised. By now it is well settled that there is vexed distinction between jurisdictional error and error of law/fact within jurisdiction. For rectification of errors statutory remedy has been provided. The SLP preferred against the said order was dismissed by Hon ble Su .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates