Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 1076 (ALL)

Parvarish Tax Products Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India Thru' Secry. Finance

2016-03-28

DILIP GUPTA, SURYA PRAKASH KESARWANI

body2016
JUDGMENT This writ petition has been filed claiming the following reliefs: "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari and quash the reassessment proceedings initiated against the petitioner for AY 2008-09 vide reassessment notice dated 18.3.13 (Annexure-2) issued by the Income Tax Officer - 6(2), Kanpur / respondent no.2 and all consequential proceedings initiated or concluded against the petitioner in pursuance of the aforesaid notice. (ii) Award cost of this petition to the petitioner. (iii) Pass such other and further writ, order or direction in favour of the petitioner, as this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case." 2. Sri S.D. Singh learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the rejection of the objections by order dated 7 February 2014 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Income Tax Officer, Kanpur on the ground that the objections to the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act are vague is patently erroneous inasmuch as the assessee had submitted objection on 19 November 2013 and 16 December 2013 in which the details of interest income received during the relevant assessment year 2008-09 were specifically mentioned. 3. Learned counsel for the department submits that the objection of the assessee was considered and thereafter the order was passed by the Assessing Officer and, therefore, the assessee should participate in the reassessment proceedings. 4. We have carefully considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties. 5. It is undisputed that pursuant to the notices dated 25 November 2013 and 4 October 2013 issued by the Assessing Officer annexing therewith the reasons, the assessee submitted objection dated 19 November 2013 (Annexure-8) in which the details of interest received from various persons and the interest income disclosed in the tax return for the assessment year 2008- 09 have been mentioned. It has also been stated that there is no suppression as alleged in the notice and in this connection the assessee placed the Income Tax return and the disclosure made therein in Schedule TDS-2. Therefore, the Assessing Officer could not have in such circumstances observed in the order dated 7 February 2014 that the objections were vague and infructuous. 6. It has also been stated that there is no suppression as alleged in the notice and in this connection the assessee placed the Income Tax return and the disclosure made therein in Schedule TDS-2. Therefore, the Assessing Officer could not have in such circumstances observed in the order dated 7 February 2014 that the objections were vague and infructuous. 6. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer and Others reported in 2003 (259)ITR 19 SC considered the duty of the assessing authority to decide the objection and held as under: - "We see no justifiable reason to interfere with the order under challenge. However, we clarify that when a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act is issued, the proper course of action for the noticee is to file return and if he so desires, to seek reasons for issuing notices. The Assessing Officer is bound to furnish reasons within a reasonable time. On receipt of reasons, the noticee is entitled to file objections to issuance of notice and the Assessing Officer is bound to dispose of the same by passing a speaking order. In the instant case, as the reasons have been disclosed in these proceedings, the Assessing Officer has to dispose of the objections, if filed, by passing a speaking order, before proceeding with the assessment in respect of the above said five assessment years." (Emphasis supplied by us) 7. In view of the aforesaid, moulding the relief the order dated 7 February 2014 is set aside. The Assessing Officer shall pass a fresh order in accordance with law after taking into consideration the objections filed by the petitioner, before proceeding further pursuant to the notice dated 18 March 2013. 8. The writ petition is, accordingly, allowed to the extent indicated above.