Case LawHigh Court › Fabulous Travel Services Private Limited...

Fabulous Travel Services Private Limited v. Income Tax Officer Ward 13(1) And Ors

High Court 12 May 2023 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · calcutta_original_side
Parties
Fabulous Travel Services Private Limited v. Income Tax Officer Ward 13(1) And Ors
Date of order
12 May 2023
Assessment year(s)
2016-17
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Fabulous Travel Services Private Limited v. Income Tax Officer Ward 13(1) And Ors, the High Court (2023) decided the matter.

Decision: In view of the discussion and observation made above, this writ petition being WPO 1037 of 2023 stands disposed of.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

ORDER SHEET WPO/1037/2023 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE FABULOUS TRAVEL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED VS INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 13(1) AND ORS. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE MD. NIZAMUDDIN Date: 12[th ]May, 2023. Appearance: Mr. Rites Goel, Adv. …For the Petitioner Mr. Vipul Kundalia, Adv. …For the Respondents The Court : Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties. By this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 31[st] July, 2022 under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 relating to assessment year 2016-17 by raising the pure question of law relating to the jurisdiction of the assessing officer concerned in passing the aforesaid impugned order by non-compliance of the formalities of taking approval of the specified authority mentioned in Section 151(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Admitted position in this case is that impugned order under Section 148A(d) of the Act has been passed after a lapse of three years from the end of the relevant assessment year and in this case specified authority is not the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax from whom approval has been taken before passing the aforesaid impugned order and it appears on a plain reading of Section 151(ii) of the said Act that Principal CIT from whom approval has been taken is not the specified authority for the purpose of approval under Section 148 and Section 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, submission of the parties and the aforesaid factual and legal position, the aforesaid impugned order under Section 148A(d) of the Act dated 31[st] July, 2022 and all subsequent proceedings are quashed. However, quashing of the impugned order and subsequent proceedings will not be a bar on the part of the Income Tax Authorities concerned to proceed further in accordance with law from the stage such irregularity has been committed, after taking approval from the ‘specified authority’. In view of the discussion and observation made above, this writ petition being WPO 1037 of 2023 stands disposed of. (MD. NIZAMUDDIN, J.) s.pal
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ Defend a reassessment (Sec 148) notice → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan