Anvay Warehousing Llp v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 43(1), Kolkata & Ors

23.6.2022 ks sl. 17 ks WPA 11273 of 2022 Anvay Warehousing LLP Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 43(1), Kolkata & Ors. Mr. Ananda Sen,Mr. Souvik Ghosh … For the Petitioner.Ms. Smita Das De … For the Respondents. Heard learned Advocates appearing for the parties. By this writ petition, petitioner has challenged theimpugned order dated 30[th] April, 2022, under Section148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 relating toAssessment Year 2015-2016 and subsequent noticeunder Section 148 of the Act on the basis of a noticedated 28[th] March, 2022 under Section 148A(b) of theAct, on the ground that the impugned notice underSection 148A(b) of the Act itself is in contrary to law inthe sense that under Section 148A(b) of the Act, theAssessing Officer shall have to give minimum sevenday’s time to respond to the notice under Section148A(b) of the Act while it appears from record beingAnnexure P-2 at page 28 of the writ petition that theimpugned notice was issued on 28[th] March, 2022 andthe petitioner was asked to respond the same on thevery next date i.e by 29[th] of March, 2022. Petitionerhas raised his grievance of non-compliance of theformalities of giving seven day’s notice under Section 148A by its representation dated 28[th] March, 2022being Annexure P-3 to the writ petition, which wasignored by the Assessing Officer and he has passed theimpugned order dated 30[th] April, 2022 under Section148A(d) of the Act and issued subsequent notice underSection 148 of the Act. Ms. Das De, learned Advocate appearing for therespondents, Income Tax Authority is not in a positionto contradict the allegations of violation of relevantprovisions of law as referred hereinabove by thepetitioner in issuance of notice under Section 148A(b)of the Act and the passing of subsequent order underSection 148A(d) of the Act. Considering the facts and circumstances of thecase as appears from record and submission of theparties, I am of the view that the impugned orderdated 30[th] April, 2022, under Section 148A(d) andsubsequent notice under Section 148 of the Act arenot sustainable in law and, accordingly the same areset aside and the matter is remanded back to theAssessing Officer concerned to pass a fresh order inaccordance with law by passing a reasoned andspeaking order after giving an opportunity of hearingto the petitioner or its authorised representative andafter considering the response to the impugned noticeunder Section 148 of the Act, which has to be filed by the petitioner within seven days from date. In case ofdefault in filing the response within the time stipulatedherein, this order will lose its force. With these observations and directions, this writpetition being WPA 11273 of 2022 is disposed of. ( Md. Nizamuddin, J. )