The High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking quashing of income tax reassessment notices and orders. The court held that since the petitioner had an alternative remedy of appeal under Section 246-A, the writ jurisdiction was not liable to be exercised.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 3
Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 500 of 2022
Petitioner :- Beyond Research And Development Limited Respondent :- Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashish Bansal Counsel for Respondent :- Gaurav Mahajan
Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J. Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J.
1. Heard Shri Ashish Bansal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Manu Ghildyal, learned counsel for the respondentIncome Tax Department.
2. This writ petition has been filed praying for the following reliefs:-
"(i) issue writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari so as to quash the notice dated 30.03.2021 (Annexure-10) issued under section 148 by the Respondent No.3, as the same being illegal and invalid being based on 'change of opinion';
(ii) issue writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari so as to quash the notice dated 20.12.2021 & 28.02.2022 issued under section 142(1) by the Respondent No.2 (Annexures - 14 & 16), for the purposes of making reassessment and that too in pursuance of an invalid proceedings under section 147 of the Act;
(iii) issue writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari so as to quash the show cause notices dated 14.03.2022 & 15.03.2022 issued under by the Respondent No.2 section 142(1) (Annexure 18), for the purposes of making addition by invoking section 68 of the Act and that too in pursuance of an invalid proceedings under section 147 of the Act;
(iv) issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondent Nos 2 & 3 not to proceed further during the pendency of the present writ petition;
(v) award cost of petition to the petitioner;
(vi) grant such other relief as is found to be admissible under law and equity.
(vii) Issue a Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of Certiorari to quash the Assessment Order dated 30.03.2022 passed by Respondent No.2 (Annexure No. 24).
(viii) Issue writ order or direction in nature of mandamus directing Respondent Nos.2 & 3 not to proceed further towards the recovery of demand created in consequence of the impugned assessment order dated 30.03.2022 (Annexure-24)/not treat the Petitioner company as assessee in default during the pendency of the present writ petition."
3. Re-assessment proceeding was initiated by the assessing authority for the Assessment Year 2017-18 for 'reason to believe' that the petitioner has unexplained cash credit of
Rs.10.86 crores. The petitioner submitted objection to the 'reason to believe' which was decided by the authority concerned by an order dated 28.03.2022 observing in paragraph
3.3.2 as under:-
"3.3.2. It is pertinent to note that the Assessing Officer was in receipt of information from the Investigation Unit, Kanpur that during the course of investigation the assessee company failed to explain the cash credits during the relevant previous year, amounting to Rs. 10.86 Crores, credited in account maintained with Bank of Baroda A/c No. 25770200000271 of the assessee company. Further, during the course of investigation the assessee company was asked to furnish the KYCs of the customers who have deposited cash amount with the company, deeds of immovable properties. purchased, details of expenses incurred towards development of land etc along with the details of huge amount of cash deposited under the head "customer agreement collection charges". But the assessee company failed to furnish the details of such extraordinary amount of cash collected under this head. Thus, the source of cash credits remained unexplained. Therefore, the Assessing Officer has valid reason to believe that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment in the case of the assessee for A.Y. 2017-18."
4. Thus, the reason to believe exists inasmuch as the information available in the hands of the respondents cannot be said to be irrelevant, arbitrary or extraneous.
5. Against the impugned re-assessment order dated 30.03.2022, the petitioner has an alternative remedy of appeal under Section 246-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Therefore, the present writ petition is dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy.
Order Date :- 25.4.2022 SK
Digitally signed by SUSHEEL KUMAR Date: 2022.04.26 16:18:00 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to quash notices and assessment orders issued under Section 148 and 142(1) of the Income Tax Act
Whether writ jurisdiction can be exercised when an alternative remedy of appeal exists under Section 246-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961
4 provisions across 1 enactments
Beyond Research And Development Limited
Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax
2 Others
Surya Prakash Kesarwani
Jayant Banerji
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
