Concept Studio (India) Private Limited v. Income Tax Department, Circle 4(2), Delhi & Anr

Signature Not Verified $~64 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI +W.P.(C) 14897/2022 CONCEPT STUDIO (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Petitioner Through:Mr.Sumit Lalchandani with Mr.SalilKapoor, Mr.Tarun Chanana andMs.Ananya Kapoor, Advocates.Kapoor, Mr.Tarun Chanana andMs.Ananya Kapoor, Advocates. versus INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, CIRCLE 4(2), DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents Through:Mr.Shray Nargotra, Advocate for Mr.Kunal Sharma, Sr.StandingCounsel for the Revenue.Counsel for the Revenue. Date of Decision: 20[th]October, 2022 % CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHANHON’BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA J U D G M E N T MANMOHAN, J: C.M.No.45768/2022 Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) No.14897/2022 & C.M.No.45767/2022 1.Present writ petition has been filed challenging the order passed underSection 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’] and the noticeissued under Section 148 of the Act both dated 27[th]July, 2022 for the W.P.(C) No.14897/2022 Assessment Year 2013-14. 2.Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the impugned orderdated 27[th]July, 2022 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act is a non-speaking order that does not discuss any of the contentions raised by thePetitioner.He states that the Petitioner in its reply dated 06[th]June, 2022informed the Respondents that the sale deed supplied by the Respondents aspart of the information was a ‘corrupt file’ which did not open in thepetitioner’s computer system. Petitioner also requested the Respondents tore-supply the same along with the other information and material on thebasis of which the re-assessment proceedings were sought to be initiated.He emphasises that the said documents were never supplied to thePetitioner. 3.He further states that in the order passed under Section 148A(d), theonly contention of the Petitioner that was noted was that the Petitioner hadnot been supplied with the sale deed along with the show cause notice.However, the order merely goes on to state that the reply of the Petitionerwas not found to be tenable. 4.Issue notice. Mr.Shray Nargotra, Advocate accepts notice on behalfof the Respondents-Revenue. 5.He, on instructions, states that the Assessing Officer has no objectionif the order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act as well as the noticeissued under Section 148 of the Act are setaside.He assures andundertakes to this Court that the sale deed as well as the other relevantinformation/material shall be furnished to the Petitioner within two weeks. 6.Keeping in view the aforesaid, the present writ petition is allowed andthe impugned order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act as well as the Signature Not Verified notice issued under Section 148 of the Act, both dated 27[th]July, 2022, forthe Assessment Year 2013-14 are set aside. The Respondents are directed tosupply the relevant information/material to the Petitioner including a copy ofthe sale deed within two weeks. The Assessing Officer is directed to decidethe matter afresh and pass a reasoned order under Section 148A(d) of theAct within four weeks thereafter. 7.Accordingly, the present writ petition along with pending applicationstands disposed of.The rights and contentions of all the parties are leftopen. MANMOHAN, J MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J OCTOBER 20, 2022KA