Pushpa Chhajer v. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN ATJODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5336/2020 Pushpa Chhajer W/o Mahendra Chhajer, Aged About 62 Years,Proprietor Of M/s Bhaval Export, Resident Of C-69, ShastriNagar, Jodhpur, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Income TaxDepartment, Paota C Road, Jodhpur 2. Assistant and Deputy Commissioner Of Income TaxACIT/DCIT, Circle 1, Jodhpur ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sundeep Bhandawat HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI 02/09/2020 Judgment / Order This writ petition has been preferred on behalf of thepetitioner being aggrieved with the notice dated 26.2.2020(Annex.-5) issued by the respondent No.2 under Section 148of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act of 1961’) forthe assessment year 2015-16. In the above notice, the respondent No.2 has mentioned that it has reasons to believe that the petitioner’s incomechargeable to tax for the assessment year 2015-16 hasescaped asessment within the meaning of section 147 of theAct of 1961 and, therefore, the petitioner was asked to deliver her return in the prescribed form for the saidassessment year within thirty days. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted thatafter receiving of notice dated 26.2.2020, the petitioner videletter dated 3.4.2020 (Annex.-6) asked for supply of reasonsalong with copy of sanction letter but the same have not beensupplied to her till date and the respondent No.2 isproceeding against the petitioner under Section 148 of theAct of 1961 without giving any reasons for the same and thepetitioner has every reason to believe that no reasons havebeen recorded by the respondent No.2 while issuing noticedated 26.2.2020 (Annex.-5). Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted thatthe Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. Vs. Income-Tax Officer and Others,reported in 2003 (1) SCC 72 has specifically held that theAssessing Officer is bound to furnish reasons within areasonable time and after receipt of reasons, the noticee isentitled to file objections to issuance of notice and theAssessing Officer is bound to dispose of the same by passinga speaking order. Learned counsel for the petitioner hasargued that the respondent No.2 has not followed the dueprocedure and is bent upon to pass the final order underSection 148 of the Act of 1961 without giving properopportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of GKNDriveshafts (India) Ltd. (supra) has held as under :- “However, we clarify that when a notice undersection 148 of the Income-tax Act is issued, the propercourse of action for the noticee is to file a return and ifhe so desires, to seek reasons for issuing notices. TheAssessing Officer is bound to furnish reasons within areasonable time. On receipt of reasons, the noticee isentitled to file objections to issuance of notice and theAssessing Officer is bound to dispose of the same bypassing a speaking order.” In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed ofwith a direction to the Assessing Officer to supply the reasonsto the petitioner pursuant to her representation dated3.4.2020 (Annex.-6) within a period of one week from thedate of receipt of certified copy of this order. On receipt ofreasons, the petitioner may file her objections within a periodof one week thereafter to issuance of notice dated 26.2.2020and the Assessing Officer shall consider those objections anddispose of the same by passing a speaking order within areasonable time. It is made clear that without following the abovereferred procedure the Assessing Officer shall not pass anyfinal order pursuant to the notice dated 26.2.2020 (Annex.-5). ms rathore (VIJAY BISHNOI),J