TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 400X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) and extendable beyond 3 years till 10 years, provided the income which has escaped assessment is Rs. 50,00,000/- or more which is absent in the impugned Notices as indicated herein above. The three-year time period of A.Y 2016-17 had ended on 31.03.2020. Accordingly, the Impugned Notice, dated 21.07.2022, is beyond 3 years time period. Further, the said notice is for alleged escaped income of Rs. 39,21,450/- which is less than Rs. 50,00,000/- and thus, the said notice cannot take the benefit of extended period of limitation which is beyond three years till ten years. Thus, the Impugned Notice dated 21.07.2022, issued under Section 148, is barred by the limitation period prescribed under Section 149 of the Act. Accordingly, the Impugned Notice issued u/s 148, is barred by the limitation period prescribed under Section 149 and is illegal, unsustainable and void ab initio and is liable to be set-aside and consequently, all subsequent actions/notice/orders are also liable to be quashed. It is a well-established principle of law that if the foundation of any proceeding is illegal and unsustainable in law, then all consequential proceedings or order are also bad in law. Sinc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted 22.06.2022, the petitioner on 28.06.2022 had replied and submitted relevant documents and complied the requirement of notice to show-cause. However, the respondent department had passed the impugned order on 21.07.2022 under Section 148A(d) of the Act and on the same date i.e., 21.07.2022 notice under Section 148 of the Act was also issued for reassessment for the Assessment Year 2016-17 and finally reassessment order was passed on 31.05.2023 against this petitioner and consequential Notice of Demand was also issued. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the impugned notices/orders on following grounds: (A) Impugned Notice dated 21.07.2022 U/s 148 of the I.T Act, 1961 has been issued beyond limitation period prescribed U/s 149 of the I.T Act, 1961 and thus is time barred and void. (B) Impugned Notice dated 21.07.2022 u/s 148 of the I.T Act, 1961 and also the Impugned Order dated 21.07.2022 u/s 148A (d) have been issued without the approval of the prescribed authority under Section 151 of the I.T Act, 1961. (C) The Impugned Order dated 21.07.2022 was passed without considering the replies dated 04.06.2022 and 28.06.2022 filed by the Petitioner. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the Assessment Year 2016-17 alleging therein that the Assessing Officer has contravened the provisions of Section 149 of the Income Tax Act as income alleged to have escaped assessment was less than Rs. 50 lakhs. (v) The petitioner then filed an Interlocutory Application to amend the said writ petition, which was allowed by this Hon ble Court. Accordingly, the petitioner amended the said writ petition and challenged, inter alia, the quashing and setting aside the Reassessment Order dated 31.05.2023 passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 147 of the Act along with the Demand Notice issued u/s 156 of the Act. (vi) In view of the facts stated above, there is no illegality in the action of the Assessing Officer as there is no contravention of any provisions of the Income Tax Act. Secondly, if the petitioner has any grievance against the Assessing Officer, he always has the option of availing alternative remedy to challenge the same, first, before the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) u/s 246A of the Act and then before the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal under Section 253 of the Act and if he is still aggrieved, it may approach the Hon ble High Court u/s 260 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iled by the petitioner, was passed after giving due opportunity of being heard to the Assessee and thereafter, notice u/s 148 of the I.T Act was issued. Since there was no stay of any Court, the Assessment was completed u/s 147 of the IT Act on 31.05.2023. (ix) The CBDT vide its Instruction no. 01/2022 dated 11.05.2022 has directed that the cases reopened u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 shall be completed by 31.05.2023 in pursuance of the judgement of Hon ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal no. 3005/2022 in the case of Uol vs. Ashish Agarwal and ors. (2022 SCC Online SC 543). It is a settled principles of law that if any notification is passed validly under an Act, then the notification also becomes an integral part of the said act. The Income Tax Act has provided a strict time-line to complete the assessment or reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, once initiated under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. If the said proceedings are not completed within the stipulated time-line, it will be barred by limitation. In view of above, there is no illegality in the assessment order passed u/s 147 of the Act. 8. Learned Sr. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the I.T Act, 1961 is normally three years from the end of the relevant assessment year (in this case A.Y 2016-17) and extendable beyond 3 years till 10 years provided the income which has escaped assessment is Rs. 50,00,000/- or more and the permission of the concerned authority is taken. The three-year time period of A.Y 2016-17 had ended on 31.03.2020. Accordingly, the Impugned Notice, dated 21.07.2022, is beyond 3 years time period. Further, the said notice is for alleged escaped income of Rs. 39,21,450/- which is less than Rs. 50,00,000/- and thus, the said notice cannot take the benefit of extended period of limitation which is beyond three years till ten years. Thus, the Impugned Notice dated 21.07.2022, issued under Section 148, is barred by the limitation period prescribed under Section 149 of the Act. 11. Learned counsel for the revenue has relied upon the judgment of M/s Godrej Sara Lee Ltd. (supra) wherein the decision of Hon ble Supreme court reported in Whirlpool Corporation (supra) has been quoted to carve out the exceptions on the existence whereof a Writ Court would be justified in entertaining a writ petition despite the party approaching it not having ava ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
