Delhi High Court - Orders
Ernst And Young (Emeia) Services ... vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 10 January, 2024
Author: Yashwant Varma
Bench: Yashwant Varma, Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav
$~13
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 14248/2023 & CM APPL. 56341/2023 (interim relief)
ERNST AND YOUNG (EMEIA)
SERVICES LIMITED ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Kamal Sawhney, Mr.
Nikhil Agarwal, Mr. Nishank
Yashistha & Mr. Puru
Mendhira, Advs.
versus
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE
INT. TAXATION- 1(2)(2), NEW DELHI ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Sunil Agarwal, SSC with
Mr. Shivansh B. Pandya, JSC &
Mr. Utkarsh Tiwari, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR
KAURAV
ORDER
% 10.01.2024
1. Mr. Agarwal, learned counsel representing the respondent prays for and is granted three weeks' further time to file a reply in terms of our last order. The petitioner shall have a week thereafter to file a rejoinder affidavit, if so chosen and advised.
2. Let the petition be called again on 01.03.2024.
3. For the purposes of considering the prayer for interim relief Mr. Sawhney, learned counsel for the petitioner draws our attention to the following directions as embodied in the judgement rendered by the Division Bench of the Court in Suman Jeet Agarwal vs. Income-tax Officer [(2022) SCC OnLine Del 3141]:
"28.7 We hold that, in order for this mode of transmission i.e. uploading of the Notices in the E-filing portal of the assesses, to be considered valid service, the Department should have issued a This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/01/2024 at 03:36:56 real time alert as provisioned in the aforementioned Section 144(B)(6)(ii)(a) of the Act of 1961. Since, the prescribed mode of service is not followed it is akin to no due despatch of Notices, therefore it cannot be said that the Notices were validly issued. 28.8 However, since the assesses in the present case did become aware of the Notices later and the assessment proceedings in their cases are still pending, we are not inclined to quash these Notices. 28.9 It has come on record that the ITBA records the time and date when the E-filing portal is accessed by the assessee, so the first date on which the Notices were accessed by the assesses is duly available. This date will be considered by the JAOs as the date of issuance of Notices by the JAOs."
4. It is pointed out by Mr. Sawhney that although the notice under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ["Act"] is purportedly dated 30 March 2022, the respondents despite repeated opportunities have failed to place on the record any material to establish that it was dispatched and served as per the principles laid down in the aforenoted decision prior to 31 March 2022. It is in the aforesaid context that he would contend that the proceedings are rendered barred by time.
5. Bearing in mind the aforesaid, we provide that while it will be open for the competent authority to proceed with the notice referable to Section 148 of the Act, however, any final order that may be passed adverse to the interest of the petitioner, shall not be given effect to till the next date of hearing.
YASHWANT VARMA, J.
PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J.
JANUARY 10, 2024/kk This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/01/2024 at 03:36:56