Sima Chowdhury v. Income Tax Officer, Ward

9.3.2022 ks WPA 3719 of 2022 sl. 22 Sima Chowdhury Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward No.50(1) Kolkata & Ors. Mr. Anil Dugar,Mr. Rajarshi Chatterjee … For the Petitioner. Mr. Manabendra Nath Bandyopadhyay … For the Respondents. Heard learned Advocates appearing for the parties. In this writ petition, petitioner has challenged theimpugned notice dated 18[th] March, 2020, underSection 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 relating toassessment year 2013-2014 and from record itappears that this writ petition has been filed on 1[st] ofMarch, 2022, i.e. almost after two years from the dateof issuance of impugned notice under Section 148 ofthe Act without making any objection against thesame, which petitioner could have availed in view ofthe decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the caseof GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officerand Others, reported in 259 ITR page 19, and withoutmaking any explanation at all for this inordinate delayin filing this writ petition and petitioner is submittingthat since the new Act has come substituting the oldprovision under Section 148 of the Act now therespondent/Assessing Officer has no power at all toproceed on the basis of the aforesaid notice under Section 148 of the Act which when the impugnednotice was issued, new Act was not even born. Itseems that the sole intention of the petitioner is toevade the tax by making flimsy grounds and withoutmaking any objection before the Officer concernedagainst the same under Section 148 of the Act norapproaching this Court immediately against theaforesaid impugned notice and petitioner deliberatelykept quiet and now wants this Court to interfere withthe aforesaid impugned notice almost after two years. Accordingly, this writ petition, being WPA 3719 of2022 is dismissed with a cost of Rs.15,000/- to bepaid by the petitioner to the Income Tax Departmentconcerned. ( Md. Nizamuddin, J. )