Case LawHigh Court › Sl v. P.m. Assistant Commissioner Of Inc...

Sl v. P.m. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle – 7(1), Kolkata & Ors

High Court 07 Jun 2022 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · calcutta_appellate_side
Parties
Sl v. P.m. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle – 7(1), Kolkata & Ors
Date of order
07 Jun 2022
Assessment year(s)
2018-2019
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Sl v. P.m. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle – 7(1), Kolkata & Ors, the High Court (2022) decided the matter.

Decision: With this observation and direction this writ petition being WPA 8890 of 2022 stands disposed of.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

The order — as passed by the High Court

WPA 8890 OF 2022 07.06.2022 Sl no. 20 Hinayana Commodities Private Limited. Ct no. 2 - Vs - P.M. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle – 7(1), Kolkata & Ors. Mr. Sandip Choraria, Mr. Rajarshi Chatterjee, Mr. Sukalpa Seal … for the petitioner Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee … for the respondents Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties. In this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 27[th] March, 2022 passed under Section 148A(d) relating to assessment year 2018-2019. Pursuant to the notice under Section 148A(d) dated 15[th] March, 2022, by which the petitioner was asked to give his response on or before 21[st] March, 2022, on the ground that the aforesaid impugned order has been passed without considering and referring or discussing with its response dated 26[th] March, 2022 being Annexure P/3 to the writ petition. Petitioner submits that time to give response to the aforesaid notice dated 15[th] March, 2022, under Section 148A(b) of the Act is not clear seven days has per statute and further, petitioner’s prayer for adjournment and extension of time to give response was neither considered nor rejected before passing the aforesaid impugned order under Section 148A(d) of the Act. On perusal of the aforesaid impugned order dated 26[th] March, 2022 I find that there is no reference or discussion of the response of the petitioner dated 26[th] March, 2022 which was available to the Assessing Officer before passing the aforesaid impugned order. Considering the submission of the parties and in view of violation principle of natural justice, the aforesaid impugned order dated 27[th] March, 2022 and subsequent under Section 148 of the Act are set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Assessing Officer to pass afresh order under Section 148A(d) by taking into consideration the response of the petitioner dated 26[th] March, 2022 and after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or it’s authorized representatives within four weeks from the date of communication of this order. With this observation and direction this writ petition being WPA 8890 of 2022 stands disposed of. (Md. Nizamuddin, J.)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ Defend a reassessment (Sec 148) notice → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan