Zoom Commercial (P) Limited v. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ranchi

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(T) No. 3586 of 2021 With W.P.(T) No. 3543 of 2021 Zoom Commercial (P) Limited through its director Sulekha Jalan R/o Ranchi --- --- Petitioner (In both cases) Versus 1.Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi 2.The Commissioner, National Faceless Assessment Centre, New Delhi 3.The Deputy / Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-3, Ranchi 4.Income Tax Office, Ward-3(3), Ranchi --- --- Respondents (in both cases) ….... CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGHHON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN Through Video Conferencing For the Petitioner : M/s Prashant Pallav, Shivani Jaluka, Advocate For the Respondents : Ms. Amrita Sinha, Advocate 03/08.02.2022 Petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers: W.P.(T) No. 3586 of 2021 a)For the issuance of an appropriate writ(s), order(s) or direction (s) for quashing of the notice dated 9[th] of March 2020 (Annexure-1) issue under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as the impugned notice is wholly without jurisdiction and has been issued solely on the basis of the information received by the investigation wing of the respondent department, without forming any independent ‘reason to believe’. b)For the issuance of such other writ(s), order(s), or direction(s) for quashing of the notice dated 23[rd] of February 2021(Annexure-3) as the ‘reason to believe’ is not in accordance with the principle of law. The ‘reason to believe ‘ so specified is entirely vague and formed solely on the basis of the information received by the Assessing Officer from the Investigating Wing of the Department. c)For the issuance of such other writ(s), order (s), or direction(s) for quashing of the show cause notice dated 28[th] of August 2021, (Annexure-7) as the same is wholly without jurisdiction and illegal owing to the fact that the respondent department has completely ignored the ‘principle of precedence’ which is well applicable in assessment proceedings under the Income Tax Act, 1961. d)For the issuance of such other writ(s), order(s), or direction(s) staying the operation of the notice dated 9[th]of March 2020 (Annexure-1) and notices subsequent thereof till the instant petition is adjudicated by this Hon’ble Court. e)For the issuance of such other writ(s), order(s), or direction(s) as this Hon’ble Court may think just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case doing conscionable justice to the petitioner. -2- W.P.(T) No. 3543 of 2021 a)For the issuance of an appropriate writ(s), order(s) or direction (s) for quashing of the notice dated 20[th] of March 2020 (Annexure-1) issue under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as the impugned notice is wholly without jurisdiction and has been issued solely on the basis of the information received by the investigation wing of the respondent department, without forming any independent ‘reason to believe’.direction (s) for quashing of the notice dated 20[th] of March 2020 (Annexure-1) issue under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as the impugned notice is wholly without jurisdiction and has been issued solely on the basis of the information received by the investigation wing of the respondent department, without forming any independent ‘reason to believe’. a)For the issuance of an appropriate writ(s), order(s) or direction (s) for quashing of the notice dated 20[th] of March 2020 (Annexure-1) issue under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as the impugned notice is wholly without jurisdiction and has been issued solely on the basis of the information received by the investigation wing of the respondent department, without forming any independent ‘reason to believe’.direction (s) for quashing of the notice dated 20[th] of March 2020 (Annexure-1) issue under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as the impugned notice is wholly without jurisdiction and has been issued solely on the basis of the information received by the investigation wing of the respondent department, without forming any independent ‘reason to believe’. b)For the issuance of such other writ(s), order(s), or direction(s) for quashing of the notice dated 23[rd] of February 2021(Annexure-3) as the ‘reason to believe’ is not in accordance with the principle of law. The ‘reason to believe ‘ so specified is entirely vague and formed solely on the basis of the information received by the Assessing Officer from the Investigating Wing of the Department. direction(s) for quashing of the notice dated 23[rd] of February 2021(Annexure-3) as the ‘reason to believe’ is not in accordance with the principle of law. The ‘reason to believe ‘ so specified is entirely vague and formed solely on the basis of the information received by the Assessing Officer from the Investigating Wing of the Department. c)For the issuance of such other writ(s), order (s), or direction(s) for quashing of the show cause notice dated 28[th] of August 2021, (Annexure-7) as the same is wholly without jurisdiction and illegal owing to the fact that the respondent department has completely ignored the ‘doctrine of precedence’ which is well applicable in assessment proceedings under the Income Tax Act, 1961. direction(s) for quashing of the show cause notice dated 28[th] of August 2021, (Annexure-7) as the same is wholly without jurisdiction and illegal owing to the fact that the respondent department has completely ignored the ‘doctrine of precedence’ which is well applicable in assessment proceedings under the Income Tax Act, 1961. d)For the issuance of such other writ(s), order(s), or direction(s) staying the operation of the notice dated 20[th]of March 2020 (Annexure-1) and notices subsequent thereof till the instant petition is adjudicated by this Hon’ble Court. direction(s) staying the operation of the notice dated 20[th]of March 2020 (Annexure-1) and notices subsequent thereof till the instant petition is adjudicated by this Hon’ble Court. e)For the issuance of such other writ(s), order(s), or direction(s) as this Hon’ble Court may think just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case doing conscionable justice to the petitioner. direction(s) as this Hon’ble Court may think just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case doing conscionable justice to the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during pendency of the writ petitions, the final assessment order under Section 143(2) read with Section 148 of the Income Tax Act has been passed against which petitioner has preferred an appeal. Therefore, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this petition in order to pursue the appeal. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent Ms. Amrita Sinha has no objection to the prayer. 4. Accordingly, permission is granted. The writ petitions are dismissed as withdrawn (Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.) (Deepak Roshan, J.)