Date Of Decision: 03.07.2025 v. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-I & Another

1 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:21077 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 8014 of 2023 Date of Decision: 03.07.2025 _____________________________________________________ ....Petitioner Versus Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-I & another …Respondents ____________________________________________________ Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, JudgeHon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge Whether approved for reporting? No. ________________________________________________ For the petitioner : Mr. Vishal Mohan Senior Advocate with Mr. Praveen Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Neeraj Sharma and Mr. IshanKashyap, Advocates ________________________________________________ Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge(Oral) On 21.06.2025, the Court passed the following order:- “Heard. It is the specific case of the petitioner that it wasnot given adequate opportunity to respond to the showcause notice dated 18.03.2023 that was issued underSection 148A (b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. According tothe petitioner, the notice was served upon it on 23.03.2023in the afternoon, through speed post, giving the petitioneronly 48 hours to file its reply. 2.However, this fact is disputed by the respondentsand it is stated at the bar that in addition to the notice beingserved upon the petitioner, through post, the same wasdelivered to the assessee on its e-mail on the same dayand, thus, seven days clear time was given to the assesseeto show cause as is the requirement and mandate ofSection 148 A(b) of the Act and this notice has beenuploaded on the portal of the respondent-department. 3.This stand of the respondents is vehementlydisputed by the petitioner and it has been specifically denied that the aforesaid notice was served upon it throughe-mail and in support thereof, copy of the screenshots isattached as Annexure P-7 to substantiate that no noticedated 18.03.2023 was received by the petitioner from therespondent-department. 4.Obviously the stand of one of the parties isapparently false. However, since the respondents have notannexed any documents in support of their case, letdeponent of the affidavit, i.e. Income Tax Officer, Ward-Parwanoo, appear before this Court on the next date ofhearing alongwith the entire record. List on 24.06.2025.” 2.Thereafter, the case was listed on 24.06.2025, when the Income Tax Officer, Parwanoo appeared in person and triedto explain the case. However, we were not satisfied with theexplanation so offered and, therefore, directed both the parties tofile their respective affidavits. 3.Even though such affidavits stand filed by both theparties, however, Mr. Neeraj Sharma, Advocate, fairly concedesthat the email that was dispatched on 18.03.2023, infact had notbeen delivered to the petitioner herein, therefore, the computationof seven days from 18.03.2023 was clearly a mistake on the part of the respondents, thus, they are now ready to hear thepetitioner in the matter. 4.As the case stands adopted by the respondents, we deem it appropriate to quash the orders passed under Section148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, holding the same to beillegal and against the principle of natural justice and such 3 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:21077 ) proceedings be now commenced afresh, after affording anopportunity of hearing by filing reply/documents to the petitioner.However, before that, the respondents shall issue a fresh noticeto the petitioner under Section 148A of the Act. Orderedaccordingly. 5.Since the order itself has been quashed by thisCourt, therefore, the consequential notice dated 31.03.2023(Annexure P-6), is also quashed and set aside. 6.As the proceedings relate to the assessment year2019-20, the competent authority shall ensure that the same aredecided as expeditiously as possible and in any event by31.12.2025. 3 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:21077 ) proceedings be now commenced afresh, after affording anopportunity of hearing by filing reply/documents to the petitioner.However, before that, the respondents shall issue a fresh noticeto the petitioner under Section 148A of the Act. Orderedaccordingly. 5.Since the order itself has been quashed by thisCourt, therefore, the consequential notice dated 31.03.2023(Annexure P-6), is also quashed and set aside. 6.As the proceedings relate to the assessment year2019-20, the competent authority shall ensure that the same aredecided as expeditiously as possible and in any event by31.12.2025. The petition stands disposed of accordingly, so alsothe pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. (Tarlok Singh Chauhan) Judge (Sushil Kukreja) Judge