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 2, Cited by 4]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Savita Kapila Legal Heir Of Late Shri ... vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax on 28 May, 2020

Author: Manmohan

Bench: Manmohan, Sanjeev Narula

                                                                         #2
$~
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+     W.P.(C) 3258/2020
      SAVITA KAPILA LEGAL HEIR OF
      LATE SHRI MOINDER PAUL KAPILA             ..... Petitioner
                    Through: Mr. Siddharth Ranka with Mr. Mishal
                             Johari, Advocates
                    versus

      ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Respondent
                   Through: Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing
                            Counsel with Mr. Parth Semwal, Jr.
                            Standing Counsel for Income Tax.
      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
                   ORDER

% 28.05.2020 CM APPL.11420/2020 (exemption) Allowed, subject to just exceptions.

W.P.(C) 3258/2020 & CM APPL.11419/2020 The petition has been listed before this Bench by the Registry in view of the urgency expressed therein.

The petition has been heard by way of video conferencing. It is pertinent to mention that present writ petition has been filed challenging the notice dated 31st March, 2019 and orders dated 21st November, 2019 and 27th December, 2019 passed by the respondent.

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the Assessing Officer could not have issued the impugned notice dated 31 st March, 2019 upon a dead person. He further submits that the orders passed in pursuance to the said notice are a nullity. Learned counsel for petitioner states that no notice was ever served upon the legal heirs within time and thus the proceedings are barred by limitation. In support of his submission, he relies upon Durlabhai Kanubhai Rajpara vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(3)(7), Surat, (2019) 4 TMI 784 (Gujarat High Court); Rajender Kumar Sehgal vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 56(1) New Delhi, (2018) 12 TMI 697 (Delhi High Court); and Sumit Balkrishna Gupta vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 16(2), Mumbai & Ors., 2019 (2) TMI 1209 (Bombay High Court).

Issue notice.

Mr. Zoheb Hossain, learned standing counsel accepts notice on behalf of the respondent. He prays for and is permitted to file a counter- affidavit/reply-affidavit within a week.

Rejoinder, if any, be filed within three days thereafter. List on 11th June, 2020 for hearing and disposal. In the meantime, the operation of the impugned notice dated 31st March, 2019 and consequential orders dated 21st November, 2019 and 27th December, 2019 passed by the respondent is stayed.

The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. Copy of the order be also forwarded to the learned counsel through email.

MANMOHAN, J SANJEEV NARULA, J MAY 28, 2020/rn