Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Gehna vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Anr. on 26 May, 2003
Equivalent citations: (2003)184CTR(RAJ)446, [2004]267ITR782(RAJ)
Author: Ashok Parihar
Bench: Ashok Parihar
JUDGMENT ASHOK PARIHAR, J.
1. Looking to the short controversy involved in the present matter, the writ petition is disposed of without issuing notices to the respondents.
2. For an escaped assessment under Section 147 of the IT Act, 1961, notice under Section 148, dt, 17th June, 2002, has been issued to the petitioner for the asst. yr. 1999-2000, which is under challenge in the present writ petition.
3. The impugned notice has been challenged mainly on the ground that no reason, whatsoever, has been given by the assessing authority in the impugned notice. It has further been submitted that in spite of representation been made and reminders issued, the assessing authority has not supplied any reason, which is mandatory in nature. The Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO and Ors. (2003) 259 ITR 19 (SC), has observed that where notice under Section 148 of the IT Act is issued, the proper course of action for the noticee is to file the return and if he so desires, to seek reasons for issuing the notices. The AO 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 AO is bound to dispose of the same by passing a speaking order.
4. In the present matter, since the petitioner has already sought reasons from the concerning authorities, it is expected from them to supply the reasons for issuing notice under Section 148 of the IT Act to the petitioner within a reasonable time and if any objections are submitted, thereafter it is the duty of the AO to decide the same. Since in the present matter the above procedure has not been followed by the AO, the respondents are now directed to supply reasons for issuing notice under Section 148 of the IT Act to the petitioner within 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The petitioner shall be at liberty to submit his objections before the AO and the AO, after hearing the petitioner, may decide the objections in accordance with law and proceed further in the matter. The petitioner shall also be at liberty to seek further remedy before the appropriate forum, if still aggrieved, in accordance with law.
The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.