Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Anu Gupta vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 54(1) Delhi on 2 September, 2022

Author: Manmohan

Bench: Manmohan, Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora

                              $~14
                              *      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                              +      W.P.(C) 12683/2022 & C.M.No.38510/2022

                                     ANU GUPTA                                            ..... Petitioner
                                                       Through:     Mr.Sanjeev Rajpal, Advocate.


                                                       versus


                                     INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 54(1) DELHI              ..... Respondent
                                                       Through:     Mr.Zoheb Hossain, Sr.Standing
                                                                    Counsel for the Revenue with
                                                                    Mr.Vipul Agrawal and Mr.Parth
                                                                    Semwal, Advocates.
                              CORAM:
                              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
                              HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA

                                                       ORDER

% 02.09.2022 Present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 21st July, 2022 passed under Section 148A(d) and the notice dated 21st July, 2022 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'Act') for the assessment year 2015-16 Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the impugned order wrongly states that the Petitioner claimed LTCG of Rs.56,04,000/-, whereas no such claim was made by the Petitioner in the ITR filed for the relevant assessment year. He also states that the impugned order erroneously holds Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:JASWANT SINGH RAWAT Signing Date:05.09.2022 18:21:59 that the Petitioner failed to file reply in response to the notice issued under Section 148A(b) of the Act, whereas the Petitioner had filed detailed submission on three occasions which were not considered by the Respondent before passing the impugned order. He states that the submissions were filed on 22nd June, 2022, 16th July, 2022 and 18th July, 2022.

Issue notice. Mr.Zoheb Hossain, learned senior standing counsel accepts notice on behalf of the Respondent-Revenue.

A perusal of the paper book reveals that the Petitioner's responses dated 16th July, 2022 and 18th July, 2022 have not been considered by the Assessing Officer while passing the impugned order under Section 148A(d) of the Act.

This Court in Fena Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT Circle 7-1 & Anr., W.P.(C) No.6553/2022 quashed the order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act in similar circumstances i.e. where Assessing Officer had not taken into consideration the replies along with the documents/evidences filed by the assessee before passing the order under Section 148A(d) of the Act.

Consequently, the impugned order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act as well as the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act, both dated 21st July, 2022 are set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision to be given in accordance with law within eight weeks. It shall be open to the Assessing Officer to issue a subsequent notice enclosing all relevant material and information in his possession, after redacting the third party information, within two weeks and in that eventuality the petitioner shall be at liberty to file a reply within three weeks.

With the aforesaid directions, present writ petition along with pending application stands disposed of. It is clarified that the rights and contentions of the parties are left open.

MANMOHAN, J MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J SEPTEMBER 2, 2022 KA Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:JASWANT SINGH RAWAT Signing Date:05.09.2022 18:21:59