Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Shaily Juneja vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax ... on 20 September, 2022

Author: Manmohan

Bench: Manmohan, Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora

                              $~A-7
                              *     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                              +     W.P.(C) 10298/2022 & CM APPL.29699/2022
                                    SHAILY JUNEJA                                             ..... Petitioner
                                                        Through:     Mr.Kapil Goel, Advocate.
                                                                     (Through VC).

                                                        versus

                                    ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 34 -1
                                    AND ANR.                                  ..... Respondents
                                                 Through: Mr.Kunal     Sharma,       Sr.Standing
                                                          Counsel with Ms.Zehra Khan,
                                                          Jr.Standing Counsel and Mr.Shray
                                                          Nargotra, Advocate.

                              CORAM:
                              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
                              HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
                                                        ORDER

% 20.09.2022 Present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 27th March, 2022 passed under Section 147 read with 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ['the Act'] for assessment year 2014-15 as well as the demand notices issued under Section 156 and Section 271 of the Act.

Today, learned counsel for the respondents-revenue, admits that the petitioner's return of income had been uploaded on the e-filing portal on 15th July, 2021. He, however, submits that issuance of notice under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') is not mandatory.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the duty to issue a notice under Section 143(2) of the Act where the return under Section 148 of Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:JASWANT SINGH RAWAT Signing Date:21.09.2022 18:29:19 the Act is varied is indispensable once the return is on the records. He points out that the non-issuance of notice under Section 143(2) of the Act is a jurisdictional flaw that vitiates the impugned assessment order dated 27th March, 2022. In support of his submission, he relies on the decision of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Laxman Das Khandlwal, [2019] 417 ITR 325 (SC), Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax-1 v. M/s Consortium Nussli Comfort Net in ITA 62/2022 dated 24th March, 2022 and CIT Vs. Delhi Kalyan Samiti, ITA 696/2015 dated 22nd March, 2016.

Issue notice. Mr.Kunal Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents- revenue, accepts notice. He prays for and is permitted to file a counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, be filed before the next date of hearing.

List on 29th March, 2023.

Till further orders, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner in pursuance to the impugned order and demand notices.

MANMOHAN, J MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J SEPTEMBER 20, 2022 TS Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:JASWANT SINGH RAWAT Signing Date:21.09.2022 18:29:19