C.anitha v. Income Tax Officer,Non Corporate Ward 1(1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 18.06.2021 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM W.P.No.30862 of 2018 and W.M.P.Nos.36013, 36017, 36019 & 36021 of 2018 & 6662 of 2019 C.Anitha ...Petitioner Vs. Income Tax Officer,Non Corporate Ward 1(1),121, M.G. Road,Nungambakkam,Chennai – 600 034. ...Respondent Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of theConstitution of India, to issue a Writ of CertiorarifiedMandamus, calling for the records of the Respondent comprised inits notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961,for PAN: , for the assessment year 2011-12, dated31.03.2018 and all proceedings in furtherance thereof, includingbut not limited to the order dated 22.10.2018 passed by theRespondent disposing of the petitioner's objections to thereopening of her income tax assessment for the assessment year2011-12, and to quash the same as arbitrary, unjust and illegal,and to consequently forbear the Respondent from in any mannerreassessing the Petitioner's income under Section 147 of theIncome Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2011-12. For Petitioner : Mr.Suhrith Parthasarathy For Respondent : Ms.Hema Murali Krishnan Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax ORDER The initiation of Writ proceedings under Section 147 of theIncome Tax Act and the notice issued under Section 148 of theIncome Tax Act as well as disposal of objections passed by therespondent in proceedings dated 22.10.2018 are under challengein the present Writ Petition. 2.The petitioner states that the total income earned by herfor the assessment year 2011-2012 is well below the maximumamount, which is not chargeable to the Income Tax. Thus, thepetitioner had not filed her Income Tax returns for theassessment year 2011-2012 under Section 139 of the Income TaxAct, 1961. 3.The petitioner received a notice under Section 148 of theIncome Tax Act on 31.03.2018 stating that the respondent hasreasons to belief that income chargeable to tax in respect ofAssessment Year 2011-2012 has escaped Assessment. In responsethere to, the petitioner requested the respondent to forward thereasons for reopening. The respondent supplied the reasons forreopening by stating that 1.Purchase of immovable propertyamounting to Rs.1,05,02,000/-, 2.Interest from AXIS Mutual Fundas reflected in 26AS of Rs.57,600/-, 3.Premia from MAX NEW YORKLIFE INSURANCE COM LTD of Rs.2,62,901/-. The respondent hasfurther stated that the previous communications in this regarddo not yield any response from the petitioner. 4.The petitioner stated that all these transactions werealready looked into by the office of the respondent from theyear 2013 and however, the petitioner informed the respondentthat her income for Assessment Year 2011-2012 did not exceed themaximum amount not chargeable to tax. However, she is dulyresponsible to all previous communications from the respondentwith reference to the Assessment Year 2011-2012. Thus, thepetitioner submitted objections for reopening of Assessment fofthe year 2011-2012. However, the respondent has not consideredthe objections raised by the petitioner and passed the orderimpugned dismissing all the objections and to reopen theAssessment for the Assessment Year 2011-2012 by holding that theincome escaped assessment. 5.The learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated thatmere purchase of property would not be a ground to invokeSection 147 of the Income Tax Act. The very reasons stated thatreopening of Assessment is that as per the informationavailable, 1.Purchase of immovable property amounting toRs.1,05,02,000/-, 2.Interest from AXIS Mutual Fund as reflectedin 26AS of Rs.57,600/-, 3. Premia from MAX NEW YORK LIFE 5.The learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated thatmere purchase of property would not be a ground to invokeSection 147 of the Income Tax Act. The very reasons stated thatreopening of Assessment is that as per the informationavailable, 1.Purchase of immovable property amounting toRs.1,05,02,000/-, 2.Interest from AXIS Mutual Fund as reflectedin 26AS of Rs.57,600/-, 3. Premia from MAX NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE COM LTD of Rs.2,62,901/-. These factual details werealready furnished and made available with the office of therespondent. Thus, there is no reason for initiation ofproceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 6.This Court is of the considered opinion that such factualadjudications cannot be undertaken by the High Court underArticle 226 of the Constitution of India. The only requirementcontemplated under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is toensure whether the authority competent has reason to belief forreopening of Assessment in respect of the income chargeable toTax as escaped assessment. In the present case, the reasonsfurnished for reopening reveals that an immovable property waspurchased for construction amounting to Rs.1,05,02,000/-,Interest from AXIS Mutual Fund as reflected in 26AS ofRs.57,600/- and further, the Premia from MAX NEW YORK LIFEINSURANCE COM LTD of Rs.2,62,901/-. All these reasons arefurnished for reopening of Assessment are to be adjudicated withreference to the documents and evidences and or informationsmade available. Roving cannot be conducted by the High Courtunder Article 226 of the Constitution of India in a WritProceedings. If any prima facie case is established and thecompetent authority has reason to belief regarding Tax escapedassessment, then the authority must be permitted to proceed withthe assessment or re-assessment. In the present case, thepetitioner made an attempt to adjudicate the issues on facts byholding that mere purchase of property is not a ground to invokeunder Section 147 of the Income Tax Act. Beyond the facts, thetransactions made, the sources on hand and other details are tobe scrutinized by the Assessing Officer for the purpose offorming an opinion. Admittedly the petitioner has not filedReturns of income for the Assessment Year 2011-2012. Therefore,the Assessment or Re-Assessment is to be made with reference tothe reasons furnished. This being the factum established, thepetitioner has to proceed with the process by producing all thedocuments and evidences to defend their case. 7.It is brought to the notice of this Court that pursuing ofthe interim order, the Assessment Officer was permitted tocomplete the adjudication and pass a final order of Assessment.Thus, the respondent is permitted to communicate the AssessmentOrder, if any already passed to the Writ Petitioner, enablingthe petitioner to redress her grievances by preferring an appealunder the provisions of the Income Tax Act, if advised. 8.Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. However,there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connectedMiscellaneous Petitions are closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS IX) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar krk ToThe Income Tax Officer,Non Corporate Ward 1(1),121, M.G. Road,Nungambakkam,Chennai – 600 034. +1cc to M/s. Hema Muralikrishnan, Advocate, Sr.28369.+1cc to Mr. Suhrith Parthasarathy, Advocate, Sr.28491 W.P.No.30862 of 2018 LN[co]NSK 20/07/2021