Wp/28120/2021 Of M/S.hermes I Tickets P Ltd v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 10.01.2022 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN W.P.NO.28120 OF 2021ANDW.M.P.NOS.29709, 29713, 29715 & 29717 OF 2021 (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) M/s.Hermes I Tickets P Ltd,(Represented by its Director),No.C-9, TVK Industrial Estate,Guindy, Chennai – 600 032.PAN: . ... Petitioner .Vs. 1. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Assessment Centre, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi – 110 003. National Faceless Assessment Centre, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi – 110 003. 2. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle – 2(1), Income Tax Department, 121, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai – 600 034. 3. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai – 1, Income Tax Department, 121, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai – 600 034. … Respondents Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution ofIndia to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call forthe records of the writ petitioner Company/Assessee on the fileof the first respondent to quash the impugned order dated29.09.2021 passed u/s 144 read with Section 144B of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2018-19 in DIN and OrderNo.ITBA/AST/S/144/2021-22/1036035169(1) and consequently directthe first respondent to complete the fresh assessment for theassessmentyear2018-19indirectingtograntreasonable/sufficient opportunity of hearing. : Mr.S.Sridhar : Mrs.Hema Muralikrishnan Senior Standing Counsel ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learnedSenior Standing Counsel for the respondents. 2. This case was already heard at length in the forenoon andthereafter passed over. The petitioner was asked instructionsas to whether the petitioner was willing to deposit any amountas a condition for setting aside the impugned order and to remitthe case back to the respondents to pass a fresh de novo order. 3. The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondentswas also requested to get instructions. However, the learnedSenior Standing Counsel was unable to get any instructions. 4. Considering the nature of the case and the amountconfirmed in the impugned order and having regard to the factsof the case and arguments advanced by the learned counsel forthe petitioner and the defence of the learned Senior StandingCounsel for the respondents, it is discernible that thepetitioner is a IATA agent engaged in booking tickets for itsclients and receives advance amounts from clients for being paidto various airline companies. The advance amount which waslying in the petitioner's account, has been added as ''anunexplained income'' in the hands of the petitioner andtherefore proceedings were initiated to finalise the assessment. 5. The petitioner had two officers namely Mr.Selvaraj whoare the Chief Financial Manager and one Ms.Swasthika, FinanceManager who were handling the accounts and Income Tax relatedissue. The Income Tax Department has sent regular intimation tothe petitioner's company in the designated email and also tothese persons who were resigned from the petitioner's companyduring sometime in 2019 and in September 2020. 6. Thus, the petitioner has not replied to various noticesissued by the Respondent. Since the assessments were gettingtime barred, the respondent proceeded to pass impugned orderdated 29.09.2021. The amount of tax payable in terms of theimpugned is a whopping amount of Rs.8,66,51,80,904/-. Thelearned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner isneither liable to the aforesaid amount nor has wherewithal topay the aforesaid amount. 6. Thus, the petitioner has not replied to various noticesissued by the Respondent. Since the assessments were gettingtime barred, the respondent proceeded to pass impugned orderdated 29.09.2021. The amount of tax payable in terms of theimpugned is a whopping amount of Rs.8,66,51,80,904/-. Thelearned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner isneither liable to the aforesaid amount nor has wherewithal topay the aforesaid amount. 7. The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondentssubmits that the petitioner has been negligent in not respondingto any of the notices and the information sought for and thatrepeated notices remained unanswered. The learned SeniorStanding Counsel for the respondents submits that there areseveral disputed question of facts which cannot be examined atlength in summary proceedings under Article 226 of theconstitution of India and therefore submits that the petitionerhas an alternate remedy under Section 246A of the Income Tax Actand therefore petitioner should be asked to file such appeal.She therefore prays for dismissal of this writ petition. 8. The petitioner has made out a case for interference asthe impugned order has been passed based on the assumption thatthe amount urging in the petitioner's account during the periodwere “an unexplained income” of the petitioner. The factremains that the two officers had left the petitioner and thusthe petitioner could not reply to notice. The fact that thepetitioner will have to be wound up if the impugned orderremains. Therefore, the impugned order is quashed, subject tothe petitioner depositing a sum of Rs.5 Crores in two equalinstalments within a period of two months from the date ofreceipt of a copy of this order. The first instalment shall bepaid before the end of first month, i.e on or before 31.01.2022and the second instalment by 14.02.2022. On payment of theaforesaid amount, the impugned order shall stands quashed. 9. As and when the petitioner deposits the aforesaid amount,the attachment order issued pursuant to the impugned assessmentorder dated 29.09.2021 shall also automatically stand vacated.The official respondents shall pass an order on merits within aperiod of ninety (90) days from the date of receipt of a copy ofthis order on such payment. 10. The impugned order which stands quashed by this ordersubject to compliance of the conditions stipulated herein, shallbe treated as a Show Cause Notice in addition to the Show CauseNotice already issued to the petitioner. 11. The petitioner shall file appropriate reply within aperiod of thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of a copy ofthis order. 12. The official respondents shall issue appropriateinstructions to the administrator of the web portal to allow thepetitioner to upload the information / reply within theaforesaid period. The petitioner is directed to cooperate withthe proceedings before the respondent in the re-assessmentproceeding pursuant to the aforesaid order. 13. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of withthe above observations. No costs. Consequently, connectedmiscellaneous petitions are also closed. Sd/-Assistant Registrar //True Copy//Sub Assistant Registrar jasTo1. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Assessment Centre, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi – 110 003.2. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle – 2(1), Income Tax Department, 121, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai – 600 034.3. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai – 1, Income Tax Department, 121, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai – 600 034. +1cc to Mr.S.Sridhar, Advocate, S.R.No.2097+1cc to Mrs.Hema Muralikrishnan, Advocate, S.R.No.2095 NK(CO)PM/19/01/2022 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/