M/S J K Lakshmi Cement Ltd v. Union Of India

-1- NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (T) No. 51 of 2020 M/s J K Lakshmi Cement Ltd. Through The Sr. Vice President, VillageMalpurikhurd, Khasadih, Post Ahirara, Tahsil Dhamdha, DurgChhattisgarh. ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1. Union of India Through The Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Income TaxDepartment (Department of Revenue), North Block, Secretariat Building,New Delhi.Department (Department of Revenue), North Block, Secretariat Building,New Delhi. 2. Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax (TDS) Income- Tax Department, Office ofthe Income Tax Officer, TDS, ACIT/DCIT (TDS), Raipur Chhattisgarh.the Income Tax Officer, TDS, ACIT/DCIT (TDS), Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of MineralResources, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa RaipurChhattisgarh.Resources, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa RaipurChhattisgarh. 4. District Mining Officer Mining Office, Collectorate Campus, DurgChhattisgarh.Chhattisgarh. ---Respondents For Petitioner:Shri N. Naha Roy, Advocate. For State:Ms. Abhyunnati Singh, Panel Lawyer. For Income Tax DepartmentShri Amit Choudhary and Smt. Naushina Ali, Advocates. Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam KoshyOrder on Board 16.03.2020 1. Challenge in the present writ petition is to the two notices issued to thepetitioner under Section 226(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated25.02.2020 and 28.02.2020 (Annexure P/1 Collectively). petitioner under Section 226(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated25.02.2020 and 28.02.2020 (Annexure P/1 Collectively). 2. The notices issued seems to be in respect of an amount of Rs.56,13,054/-due from the District Mining Officer, Mining Office, Collectorate Campus,Durg for the assessment year between 2012-13 to 2016-2017 & 2019-20to 2020-21. due from the District Mining Officer, Mining Office, Collectorate Campus,Durg for the assessment year between 2012-13 to 2016-2017 & 2019-20to 2020-21. 3. The counsel for the petitioner referring to Annexure P/3 submits that theentire liability which the petitioner is liable to pay towards the DistrictMineral Foundation has been regularly paid by the petitioner and that thereentire liability which the petitioner is liable to pay towards the DistrictMineral Foundation has been regularly paid by the petitioner and that there is no default on their part and as such the notices which have been issuedto the petitioner (Annexure P/1 Collectively) is not sustainable at all. Hefurther submits that before issuance of such notice, the petitioner has notbeen given an opportunity of explaining the liability part, if any. 4. At this juncture, earned Standing Counsel appearing for the Departmentsubmits that order under challenge is only a show cause notice and interms of Clause-vi of Section 226(3) of the Income Tax Act, the petitioneris required to submit a statement of oath and subject to petitioner's filingthe statement of oath explaining the discharge of liability so far aspetitioner is concerned and the payment that the petitioner have madeduring the intervening period for the assessment years mentioned in theshow cause notice giving details of the same, the authorities concernedshall take appropriate steps in accordance with provisions of law. submits that order under challenge is only a show cause notice and interms of Clause-vi of Section 226(3) of the Income Tax Act, the petitioneris required to submit a statement of oath and subject to petitioner's filingthe statement of oath explaining the discharge of liability so far aspetitioner is concerned and the payment that the petitioner have madeduring the intervening period for the assessment years mentioned in theshow cause notice giving details of the same, the authorities concernedshall take appropriate steps in accordance with provisions of law. 5. Given the said submission made by the Standing Counsel for theDepartment, this court as of now is of the opinion that the writ petition canbe disposed of directing the petitioner to furnish a statement of oath givingdetails of payment made to the District Mining Officer as far as contributionof the petitioner towards District Mineral Foundation for the period referredto in the notice supported with all relevant records in respect of the same. Department, this court as of now is of the opinion that the writ petition canbe disposed of directing the petitioner to furnish a statement of oath givingdetails of payment made to the District Mining Officer as far as contributionof the petitioner towards District Mineral Foundation for the period referredto in the notice supported with all relevant records in respect of the same. 6. Subject to petitioner's furnishing their statement of oath within a period of15 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, the respondentauthorities shall, on due verification, take appropriate steps in accordancewith law keeping in view the observations of the Supreme Court in case ofBeharilal Ramcharan Vs. Income Tax Officer, Special Circle 'B' Ward,Kanpur, AIR 1981 SC 1585. 15 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, the respondentauthorities shall, on due verification, take appropriate steps in accordancewith law keeping in view the observations of the Supreme Court in case ofBeharilal Ramcharan Vs. Income Tax Officer, Special Circle 'B' Ward,Kanpur, AIR 1981 SC 1585. inder 7. It is made clear that till the respondents take a decision on the statementof oath so submitted by the petitioner within the period specified, no furthersteps shall be taken upon the notice, Annexure P/1 Collectively, so far aspetitioner is concerned. of oath so submitted by the petitioner within the period specified, no furthersteps shall be taken upon the notice, Annexure P/1 Collectively, so far aspetitioner is concerned. 8. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition accordingly standsdisposed of. disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy)Judge