Samir Agarwal v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 14(1) & Ors

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 1231 OF 2012 Samir Agarwal s/o. Sh.Sital Kumar Agarwal& Anr. ..... Petitioners Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 14(1) & Ors. ..... Respondents Mr.F.B.Andhyarujina, Senior Advocate with Mr.Madhur Agarwal, Mr.Bharat Gandhi and Mr.K.C.Pandey for the Petitioners. Mr.Suresh Kumar for the Respondents. CORAM : DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD &R.D. DHANUKA, JJ. DATE : MAY 10, 2012 P.C.: By an order dated 15 February 2012 this court disposed of Writ Petition No. 266 of 2012 in which there was a grievance that an order of assessment was passed following a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, without giving reasons in support of the reopening of the assessment and without furnishing an opportunity of filing objections. This court by its order disposing of the petition, set down a time schedule for disposal of the objections, and granted a stay in order to obviate the bar of limitation. 2.The admitted position on record is that a copy of the reasons on the basis of which assessment was sought to be reopened was furnished to the petitioner on 23 February 2012. The Petitioner had a period of two weeks for filing objections. As a matter of fact, it is common ground that no hearing was furnished to the petitioner though it is the contention of the Revenue that the objections of the petitioner were not received within a period of two weeks. Be that as it may, the Revenue is now ready and willing to furnish an opportunity to the petitioner to furnish his objections on record. We accordingly direct on the request of the learned counsel for revenue and as agreed by the petitioner that the petitioner shall appear before the Assessing Officer on 14 May 2012 at 12.00 noon at which point of time the objections of the petitioner shall be heard. The A.O. shall dispose of the objections by a reasoned order within a period of one week thereafter. In the event the objections of the petitioners are rejected, the A.O. shall defer the passing of an order of assessment for a period of four weeks thereafter to enable the petitioner to seek recourse to its remedies in law. In order to facilitate the completion of the entire exercise and for a period of four weeks from today, the notice dated 23 August, 2010 shall remain stayed in order to obviate the bar of limitation and all rights and contentions of the parties are left open. The petitioner has agreed not to seek any adjournment of the proceedings on 14 May, 2012. 3.In view of the aforesaid directions and to facilitate the passing of a fresh order, the impugned order dated 27 March, 2012 is set aside. The Petition is accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J. R.D. DHANUKA, J.