Delhi High Court - Orders
Manavinder Singh vs Dy Director Of Income Tax (Inv) Unit 3(4) ... on 27 April, 2021
Author: Rajiv Shakdher
Bench: Rajiv Shakdher, Talwant Singh
$~14
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 5012/2021 and CM APPLs. 15355/2021, 15356/2021,
15357/2021
MANAVINDER SINGH .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. Rohit Jain and Mr. Aniket D.
Agrawal, Advocate.
versus
DY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INV) UNIT 3(4) NEW DELHI
..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Deepak Anand, Sr. Standing
Counsel with Mr. Vipul Agarwal,
Jr. Standing Counsel.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH
ORDER
% 27.04.2021 [Court hearing convened via video-conferencing on account of COVID-19] CM APPLs. 15356-57/2021
1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
W.P.(C) 5012/2021 and CM APPL. 15355/2021
2. Mr. Ajay Vohra, learned Senior Counsel, who appears on behalf of the petitioner, says that the impugned assessment order which is passed under the provisions of the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 (in short, „2015 Act‟) is flawed. 2.1 According to Mr. Vohra, apart from anything else, the petition raises issues concerning wrongful assumption of jurisdiction by the assessing officer under the 2015 Act, and the violation of the principles of natural justice.
W.P.(C) 5012/2021 page 1 of 3 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VIPIN KUMAR RAI Signing Date:28.04.2021 21:43:29 2.2 As per Mr. Vohra, the Assessing Officer had information with regard
to the two accounts in UBS AG, Singapore, alleged to have been held by the petitioner, if not earlier, at least, since 25.07.2013. 2.3 It is Mr. Vohra's contention that the 2015 Act came into force only on 01.07.2015 and that, under the provisions of the 2015 Act, it could only be triggered qua an income which concerned assessment year 2016-2017. 2.4 Furthermore, Mr. Vohra says that there has been a breach of principles of natural justice, inasmuch as documents, which have been relied upon by the assessing officer, were furnished to the petitioner only on 15.03.2021. It is stated that although the time was short, the petitioner furnished his reply on 26.03.2021.
2.5 In sum, it is Mr. Vohra's submission that sufficient opportunity was not given prior to passing of the impugned assessment order dated 31.03.2021.
2.6 Besides this, Mr. Vohra says that issues which have arisen in the present petition are also issues that have arisen in other writ petitions that have been filed in this court.
2.7 By way of an example, Mr. Vohra has referred to us the orders, that have been collectively marked as Annexure P-15.
3. Mr. Deepak Anand, who appears on advance notice on behalf of the revenue, refutes the submissions made by Mr. Vohra. 3.1 It is Mr. Anand's submission that since an assessment order has been passed, petitioner should take recourse to the alternate remedy available to him.
W.P.(C) 5012/2021 page 2 of 3 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VIPIN KUMAR RAI Signing Date:28.04.2021 21:43:29 3.2 Furthermore, in support of his pleas, Mr. Anand has referred to
various provisions of the 2015 Act to demonstrate that jurisdiction qua the petitioner has been correctly assumed by the assessing officer.
4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties for some time, according to us, the matter would require consideration. 4.1. Revenue's counter-affidavit, in this behalf, will be relevant. This is especially so, as Mr. Anand vehemently argues that the issues that arise in other writ petitions, to which a reference has been made to by Mr. Vohra, do not overlap with those, that have been raised in the instant petition. 4.2. It would, therefore, be in the interest of both parties to file, at least, the grounds taken in the other petitions, to which a reference has been made in the instant petition.
5. Accordingly, issue notice.
6. Mr. Anand accepts notice on behalf of the revenue.
7. Counter-affidavit will be filed within two weeks. Rejoinder thereto, if any, will be filed before the next date of hearing.
8. In the meanwhile, there will be a stay on the operation of the impugned assessment order.
9. Since we are told that the connected petitions are coming up for hearing on 20.05.2021, list the captioned petition on the same date.
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J TALWANT SINGH, J APRIL 27, 2021 sh Click here to check corrigendum, if any W.P.(C) 5012/2021 page 3 of 3 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VIPIN KUMAR RAI Signing Date:28.04.2021 21:43:29