Sunetra Sengupta v. Income Tax Officer, Ward
High Court
08 May 2023 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · calcutta_appellate_side
Parties
Sunetra Sengupta v. Income Tax Officer, Ward
Date of order
08 May 2023
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Sunetra Sengupta v. Income Tax Officer, Ward, the High Court (2023) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
8.5.2023 ks WPA 4544 of 2023 sl. 11
Sunetra Sengupta
VsIncome Tax Officer, Ward No.61 (3), Kolkata & Ors.
Mr. Avra Mazumder,Mr. Suman Bhowmik,Mr. Samrat Das,Ms. Alisha Das
… For the Petitioner.Mr. Tilak Mitra … For the Income Tax Authority.
Heard learned Advocates appearing for the parties. By this writ petition, petitioner has challenged theimpugned order dated July 27, 2022, under Section148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 relating to theassessment year 2017-2018 by raising the purequestion of law relating to the jurisdiction of theAssessing Officer concerned in passing the aforesaidimpugned order by non-compliance of the formalitiesof taking approval of the specified authority mentionedin Section 151(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Admitted position in this case is that impugnedorder under Section 148A(d) of the Act has beenpassed after a lapse of three years from the end of therelevant assessment year and in this case specifiedauthority is not the Principal Commissioner of IncomeTax-18, Kolkata from whom approval has been takenbefore passing the aforesaid impugned order and it
appears on a plain reading of Section 151(ii) of the saidAct that Principal CIT from whom approval has beentaken is not the specified authority for the purpose ofapproval under Section 148 and Section 148A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961.
Considering the fact and circumstances of thiscase, submission of the parties and the aforesaidfactual and legal position, the aforesaid impugnedorder under Section 148A(d) of the Act dated July 27,2022 and all subsequent proceedings are quashed.
However, quashing of the aforesaid impugned orderunder Section 148A(d) of the Act and subsequentproceedings will not be a bar on the part of therespondent/Assessing Officer concerned to proceedfurther from the stage where such irregularity hasbeen committed, after taking approval from the“specified authority” in accordance with law.
In view of the discussion made above, this writpetition being WPA 4544 of 2023 is disposed of.
( Md. Nizamuddin, J. )
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.