Kovalam Santhana Krishnan Mohan v. Income Tax Officer,Ward-I,Income Tax Office,Ootacamund

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 05.08.2021 CORAM : THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMAND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP W.A.NO.1884 OF 2021ANDC.M.P.NOS.12018 & 12019 OF 2021 Kovalam Santhana Krishnan Mohan... Appellant Vs. Income Tax Officer,Ward-I,Income Tax Office,Ootacamund.... Respondent Prayer : Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patentto set aside the judgment dated 26.04.2021 made in W.P.No.32371of 2017 and consequently quash and set aside notice dated30.03.2017 issued by the Respondent under Section 148 of theIncome Tax Act 1961 reopening assessment for PAN forthe assessment year 2010-11 and all proceedings in furtherancethereof including but not limited to order dated 04.12.2017disposing of the appellant's objections to the reopening ofassessment for AY 2010-11, and to quash the same as arbitrary,unjust and illegal, and to consequently forbear the Respondentfrom in any manner reassessing the appellant's income u/s 147for AY 2010-11. Prayer in WP.No.32371 of 2017:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitutionof India praying to issue a writ of Certiorarified MandamusCalling for the records of the respondent comprised in itsnotice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act 1961 forPAN: AMNPM3778N dated 30.03.2017 and all proceedings infurtherance thereof including but not limited to the orderdated 04.12.2017 disposing of the petitioners objections to thereopening of the income tax assessment for the assessment year2010-11 passed by the respondent and to quash the same asarbitrary unjust and illegal and to consequently forbear therespondent from in any manner reassessing the petitioners incomeunder section 147 of the Income Tax Act 1961 for the Assessment https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ year 2010-11 For Appellant : Mr.Suhrith Parthasarathy For Respondent : Mr.A.P.Srinivas Senior Standing Counsel J U D G M E N T (Judgment was delivered by T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.) This Writ Appeal is directed against the order, dated26.04.2021, in W.P.No.32371 of 2017, by which, the writ petitionfiled by the appellant challenging the order passed by theAssessing Officer, dated 04.12.2017, was dismissed. 2.It is admitted fact that the assessee/appellant did notfile his return of income for the Assessment Year underconsideration. Notice was issued and the matter proceeded andthere was an earlier round of litigation where the appellantcame before this Court stating that the principles of naturaljustice have been violated and well before a date was fixed forthe appellant to produce the documents, the Assessing Officerpassed an order on 25.09.2017. The writ petition was allowed byorder dated 20.11.2017, remanding the matter back to theAssessing Officer. During the pendency of the said writpetition, the appellant/assessee had submitted details of allthe transactions done by them vide letter dated 27.09.2017.This was also accompanied by the financial details of theappellant for the Assessment Year 2009-10. On remand, theAssessing Officer passed the order dated 04.12.2017, which wasalso one of the orders impugned in the writ petition. 3.The question that is to be established by theappellant/assessee is that, in respect of the two documentswhere immovable property was sold by the appellant andconsideration was received, the appellant had to prove that suchtransaction took place in the financial year relevant to theAssessment Year 2009-10. The Assessing Officer has gone by thedate of registration of the sale deed by obtaining certaininformation from the office of the Sub-Registrar, Thirupundi. 3.The question that is to be established by theappellant/assessee is that, in respect of the two documentswhere immovable property was sold by the appellant andconsideration was received, the appellant had to prove that suchtransaction took place in the financial year relevant to theAssessment Year 2009-10. The Assessing Officer has gone by thedate of registration of the sale deed by obtaining certaininformation from the office of the Sub-Registrar, Thirupundi. 4.In our considered view, this being the factual issue, itwould be better for the appellant to agitate the matter as andwhen the assessment is finalized, because it is the AssessingAuthority under the Act, who would be in a better position toappreciate the factual position. The appellant's definite caseis that, possession was handed over in February, 2009 and the transaction stood concluded in the Assessment Year 2009-10.Much reliance has been placed on the profit and loss account forthe said year, wherein, the total credit has been mentioned asRs.6,51,94,775/- and it is sought to be demonstrated before usthat it is the same figure which the appellant had submittedbefore the Assessing Officer at the very first instance. In ourconsidered view, the right course to be adopted by the appellantis to await the order of assessment and then agitate hiscontentions. Thus, we concur with the ultimate conclusionarrived at by the learned Single Bench. We are of the view thatthe appellant should avail the alternate remedy under the Actafter the assessment is concluded. 5.We are conscious of the fact that the learned Single Benchhas made certain observations on the merits of the case andcertain other observations in Para Nos.15 to 17. Since we areof the view that the appellant should agitate all thecontentions after the assessment is completed, we vacate allthose findings in the impugned order and dispose of this WritAppeal with an observation that the appellant will be free toagitate all his contentions on facts as well as law before theappropriate forum, as and when the assessment is completed. Nocosts. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions areclosed. s/d- Assistant Registrar(CS VI) True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar mkn To The Income Tax Officer,Ward-I,Income Tax Office,Ootacamund.+1cc to M/S Arun Karthik Mohan, Advocate, SR.No.38405+1cc to M/S A.P.Srinivas, Advocate, SR.No.38531 PM(CO)PM(03/09/2021) W.A.No.1884 of 2021