Wp/10193/2022 Of Photon Interactive Private Limited v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR Writ Petition No.10193 of 2022and W.M.P.Nos.9890, 9892 & 9893 of 2022 Photon Interactive Private LimitedFloor 2, Block 5, DLF IT SEZ, 1/124Mount Poonamallee Road, ManappakkamChennai 600 089, Represented by itsAuthorized Signatory Mr.Sanjiv C Lochan …. Petitioner The Assistant Commissioner of Income TaxCircle 1, LTU, Wanaparthy Block, 121Mahatma Gandhi Road, NungambakkamChennai 600 034. Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution ofIndia praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to callfor the records of the petitioner on the file of the Respondentand quash the impugned order under section 148A(d) of the IncomeTax Act 1961 dated 25.03.2022 in DIN and Notice No. ITBA/AST/F/ 148A/ 2021-22/ 1041530026(1) and the consequential noticeu/s. 148 dated 25.03.2022 in ITBA/ AST/S/ 148_1/ 2021- 22/1041530760 (1) for the Assessment year 2018 -19. The prayer sought for herein is for a Writ of Certiorari tocall for the records of the petitioner on the file of therespondent and quash the impugned order under section 148A(d)of the Income Tax Act 1961 dated 25.03.2022 in DIN and NoticeNo. ITBA/ AST/F/ 148A/ 2021-22/ 1041530026(1) and theconsequential notice u/s. 148 dated 25.03.2022 in ITBA/ AST/S/148_1/ 2021- 22/ 1041530760 (1) for the Assessment year 2018 -19. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the meaning of the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Inshort 'the Act'). In order to reopen the assessment for theassessment year 2018-19 under Section 147 of the Act, notice wasissued under Section 148, before which the Revenue has toexhaust the procedure contemplated under Section 148A of theAct. Under that process, a notice under Section 148A(b) wasissued on 17.03.2022 giving only six days time upto 23.03.2022to the assessee to respond. 3. On receipt of the said notice, the petitioner assessee,on 23.03.2022 has sent a request seeking two weeks time torespond and the said request was received and acknowledged bythe Revenue. Despite the same, the Revenue proceeded to passorders on 25.03.2022, as if that the petitioner has not givenany reply to the notice under clause(b) of Section 148A of theAct and accordingly proceeded to decide that, the notice underSection 148 of the Act can be issued against the petitionerassessee by the said order dated 25.03.2022. Challenging thesame, the present writ petition has been filed. 4. Mr.Vikram, learned counsel for the petitioner pointed outthat, even the seven days minimum period, which should be givento the assessee to respond for which notice under Clause(b) ofSection 148A, has not been given. Assuming that the noticedated 17.03.2022 was given, it gave time only upto 23.03.2022,where there is no clear seven days time. Though a request wasmade for two weeks time by a request letter dated 23.03.2022,which was received and acknowledged by the Revenue, that wasalso not considered. However, in the impugned order it isstated that there is no reply from the petitioner. Therefore,it violates the principles of natural justice. 5. Per contra, Mr.D.Prabhu Mukunth Arunkumar, learnedStanding Counsel appearing for the Revenue would submit that,from 17.03.2022 to 23.03.2022 if we calculate there is clearseven days and the minimum time as contemplated under the Acthas been given to the assessee to respond, before which sincethere is no response, the Revenue proceeded to pass orders on25.03.2022. 6. I have considered the submissions made by the learnedcounsel on either side and have perused the materials placed onrecord. 5. Per contra, Mr.D.Prabhu Mukunth Arunkumar, learnedStanding Counsel appearing for the Revenue would submit that,from 17.03.2022 to 23.03.2022 if we calculate there is clearseven days and the minimum time as contemplated under the Acthas been given to the assessee to respond, before which sincethere is no response, the Revenue proceeded to pass orders on25.03.2022. 6. I have considered the submissions made by the learnedcounsel on either side and have perused the materials placed onrecord. 7. It is mandated under Clause(b) of Section 148A thatminimum seven days and maximum 30 days time should be given whennotice is given under that Section. Here in the present case,only six days time was given and the notice itself was given on17.03.2022, where time was given upto 23.03.2022. Therefore,there is no minimum seven days time given in this case. 8. Moreover, when a request was given on 25.03.2022, havingreceipt of such request, it should have been considered by theRevenue before passing the order on 25.03.2022. However, nosuch consideration seems to have been made in this case. 9. Hence, this Court has no hesitation to hold that, thereis violation of principles of natural justice in this case inpassing the impugned order. In that view of the matter, thiswrit petition is disposed of with the following order. ●That the impugned order dated 25.03.2022 isset aside and the matter is remitted back tothe respondent Revenue for reconsideration.●While reconsidering the same, the noticedated 17.03.2022 shall be treated as a freshshow cause notice, as no fresh notice furtherwill be issued by the Revenue and, treatingthis as a fresh show cause notice, it is opento the assessee to file their reply withsupporting documents within a period of twoweeks from the date of receipt of a copy ofthis order. ●On receipt of such reply, it is open to theRevenue to pass orders under Section 148A(d)of the Act. 10. With the above directions, this writ petition isdisposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneouspetitions are closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VII) //True Copy// KSTTo Sub Assistant Registrar The Assistant Commissioner of Income TaxCircle 1, LTU, Wanaparthy Block, 121Mahatma Gandhi Road, NungambakkamChennai 600 034. +1cc to M/s. Hema Muralikrishnan, Advocate, S.R.No.29232+1cc to M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar, Advocate, S.R.No.29617 PMK(CO)CT/20/06/2022 W.P.No. 10193 of 2022