Case LawHigh Court › Hentech Agrovet Private Limited v. P.m....

Hentech Agrovet Private Limited v. P.m. Income Tax Officer, Ward

High Court 29 Nov 2022 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · calcutta_appellate_side
Parties
Hentech Agrovet Private Limited v. P.m. Income Tax Officer, Ward
Date of order
29 Nov 2022
Assessment year(s)
2016-2017
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Hentech Agrovet Private Limited v. P.m. Income Tax Officer, Ward, the High Court (2022) decided the matter.

Decision: In view of the discussion made above, this writ petition being WPA 24371 of 2022 is disposed of by quashing the aforesaid impugned order dated July 30, 2022 under Section 148A(d) of the Act.

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

Sections referenced in this judgment

The order — as passed by the High Court

WPA 24371 OF 2022 29.11.2022 Sl no. 30 Ct no. 2 Hentech Agrovet Private Limited - Vs - P.M. Income Tax Officer, Ward No. 13(1), Kolkata & Ors. Mr. Avra Mazumder, Mr. Binayak Gupta, Ms. Megha Agarwal …. for the petitioner Mr. Aryak Dutt … for Union of India. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. By this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated July 30, 2022 under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, relating to assessment year 2016-2017 on the ground that the same being without jurisdiction and contrary to the provision of Section 149(1) (a) and (b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by contending that admittedly the impugned notice has been issued after the expiry of three years from the end of relevant assessment year and it is also an admitted position which appears from the conclusion of the assessing officer himself in the impugned order that the alleged escapement of income is Rs. 2,00,000/- which is below Rs. 50 lakh. Considering the submission of the parties and admitted factual and legal position which appears on perusal of the impugned order dated July 30, 2022, I am of the considered view that the aforesaid impugned order is bad and not sustainable in law and is liable to be quashed for the reason that the impugned notice under Section 148A(b) under the newly amended Act was issued after expiry of three years from the end of relevant assessment year and the alleged escapement of income is below Rs. 50 lakh. In view of the discussion made above, this writ petition being WPA 24371 of 2022 is disposed of by quashing the aforesaid impugned order dated July 30, 2022 under Section 148A(d) of the Act. (Md. Nizamuddin, J.)
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