Mrs. Gyanti Devi v. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-1 Patna

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNACivil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3906 of 2024 ====================================================== Mrs. Gyanti Devi, W/o Shri Dilip Kumar Singh, Resident of Mamka, P.O.-Bhadwa, P.S.- Feshar, Aurangabad- 824122 (Bihar). ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1.Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1 Patna. 2.Income Tax Officer, Ward- 3 (3), Aurangabad. ... ... Respondent/s ======================================================Appearance :For the Petitioner/s: Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, Advocate Mr. Aman Raja, Advocate Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s: Mrs. Archana Sinha, Sr. SC, Income Tax Dept. Mr. Alok Kumar Sahi, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHYORAL JUDGMENT(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date : 27-11-2024 The petitioner is aggrieved with the demand raisedunder a new PAN number distinct and different from the PANnumber under which the petitioner has been filing return, whichwas validly issued to her by the department. 2. For the Assessment Year 2016-17, the petitionerfiled Annexure-P/1 returns showing the PAN number issued toher, which is . The petitioner was issued with ashow-cause notice for the said assessment year by Annexure-P/2calling for details with respect to certain purchases made ofland. The petitioner replied by Annexure-P/3 specifically quoting the PAN number issued to her, which we have noticedfrom the return filed. The petitioner was then confronted withAnnexure-P/4 demand dated 14.09.2023. 3. The petitioner then, by Annexure-P/5, applied for acertified copy of the notices issued to her. The Notices issuedunder Section 148, 142(1) and the show-cause notice underSection 144; certified copies of which were issued to thepetitioner, are produced respectively as Annexure-P/6, P/7 andP/8. The assessment order is produced as Annexure-P/9,pursuant to which Annexure-P/9A notice of demand was raised.Annexure-P/10 is the penalty order passed pursuant to theassessment made on alleged escapement of tax. 4. The petitioner contends that the notices were neverserved on her and that the procedure prescribed under Section148A with effect from 01.04.2021 was not complied with. 5. The learned Senior Standing Counsel for therespondent authority took us to Annexure-A-5, produced alongwith the counter affidavit, wherein the Principal ChiefCommissioner of Income Tax, Bihar & Jharkhand had directedissuance of Section 148 notices under the Income Tax Act, 1961against various persons, one of whom was the petitioner, who isshown at Serial No. 8. Annexure-P/5 issaid to have been issued on the basis of the directions issued by the Central Board ofDirect Taxes, as is seen from Annexure-A-4. It is the contentionthat the notices were issued based on the order of the PrincipalChief Commissioner. 6. Admittedly, the statute was amended and Section148A was introduced from 01.04.2021. Annexure-A-4 alsoindicates that the directions were with respect to handling ofNon-PAN cases. In this context, we have to notice that thenotices issued and the order passed shows a different PANnumber from that issued to the petitioner, as seen from thereturn produced at Annexure-P/1. The notices and theassessment order shows the PAN number of ,which is suo motu issued by the department. There was noreason to suo motu issue a PAN number to the petitioner, whohad a valid PAN under which she was filing return; which shehad specifically mentioned in Annexure-P/3 reply. 7. Annexure-A-4 and Annexure-A-5 does not apply tothe petitioner at all, and in any event, Section 148A proceedingshave not been followed. 8. In the above circumstances, we set aside theassessment order passed (Annexure-P/9), the demand notice(Annexure-P/9A) as also Annexure-P/10 penalty order, which is a direct consequence of the assessment made. 7. Annexure-A-4 and Annexure-A-5 does not apply tothe petitioner at all, and in any event, Section 148A proceedingshave not been followed. 8. In the above circumstances, we set aside theassessment order passed (Annexure-P/9), the demand notice(Annexure-P/9A) as also Annexure-P/10 penalty order, which is a direct consequence of the assessment made. 9. We make it clear that if the limitation period is not over, the respondent would be entitled to proceed against thepetitioner under the provisions of the Act, as it stands now. Therespondent shall also take steps to cancel the suo motu PANissued by the department, since the petitioner has already beenissued with a PAN number. 10. The writ petition stands allowed. (K. Vinod Chandran, CJ) P.K.P./- (Partha Sarthy, J) AFR/NAFRCAV DATEUploading Date28.11.2024Transmission Date