Case LawHigh Court › Jaysons Api Pharma v. Assistant Commissi...

Jaysons Api Pharma v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle – 29, Kolkata & Ors

High Court 03 Aug 2023 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · calcutta_appellate_side
Parties
Jaysons Api Pharma v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle – 29, Kolkata & Ors
Date of order
03 Aug 2023
Assessment year(s)
2019-20
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Jaysons Api Pharma v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle – 29, Kolkata & Ors, the High Court (2023) decided the matter.

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

Sections referenced in this judgment

03.08.2023.PBSl. No.22. WPA 17565 of 2023 Jaysons API Pharma VsAssistant Commissioner ofIncome Tax, Circle – 29,kolkata & Ors. Mr. Avra Mazumder,Mr. Suman Bhowmik,Mr. Kausheyo Roy,Ms. Alisha Das. … For the Petitioner.Mr. Tilak Mitra.……..for the respondent. Heard learned Advocates appearing for theparties. By this writ petition, petitioner has challengedthe impugned order under Section 148A(d) of theIncome Tax Act, 1961, dated 27[th] April, 2023, relatingto the assessment year 2019-20, on the ground thatthe impugned order being non-speaking and is in totalnon-application of mind by recording therein thatpetitioner had not filed any response to therespondent’s letter/notice dated 21[st] April, 2023, whileit is on record that by a letter dated 25[th] April, 2023being Annexure P-5 to the writ petition, petitioner hasspecifically complied the aforesaid notice of therespondents dated 21[st] April, 2023. On perusal of theaforesaid impugned order, I find that the allegation of the petitioner is substantially correct that in spite offiling its objection/response to the notice of therespondent dated 21[st] April, 2023, the same has notbeen considered in the impugned order under Section148A(d) of the Act and that the Assessing Officerconcerned in total non-application of mind hasrecorded that its aforesaid notice dated 21[st] April,2023 was not complied with. Mr. Mitra, learned advocate appearing for therespondent income tax authority could not contradictthe aforesaid allegation of the petitioner which issubstantiated by record. Considering the facts and circumstances of thecase as appears from record and submission of theparties, the aforesaid impugned order dated 27[th] April,2023, under Section 148A(d) of the Act andsubsequent proceeding are set aside and the matter isremanded back to the Assessing Officer to pass a freshorder after considering the reply of the petitioner dated25[th] April, 2023, in accordance with law and by givingan opportunity of personal hearing to the petitionerwithin 8 weeks from the date of communication of thisorder. At the time of hearing, petitioner shall beentitled to raise all the points in this writ petitionbefore the Assessing Officer. With this observation and direction, this writpetition being WPA 17565 of 2023 is disposed of. ( 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