Dismissed

Satbir v. Income Tax Officer Ward 35(5) Delhi & Anr.

Delhi HC16 Jan 2024W.P.(C)/14499/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenged Section 148 reassessment proceedings on the sole ground that the Section 148A(b) notice was not served, though it was returned undelivered at the PAN database address and the Section 148A(d) order was duly served. Following Supreme Court precedent, the court found no ground to interfere and dismissed the petition, leaving objections open before the Assessing Officer.

What the court decided

AI extract

Satbir Vs Income Tax Officer Ward 35(5) Delhi & Anr. — Income Tax | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~30

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 14499/2023 & CM APPL. 57526-57527/2023 (Stay) SATBIR ..... Petitioner

¶4

Through: Ms. Surbhi Chandra, Adv.

¶5

versus

¶6

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 35(5) DELHI & ANR.

¶7

..... Respondents

¶8

Through: Mr. Vipul Agrawal, SSC with Mr. Gibran Naushad & Ms. Sakashi Shaiwal, JSCs.

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV

¶10

O R D E R % 16.01.2024

¶11

The instant writ petition assails the proceedings under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“ Act ”] as initiated by the respondents. On a reading of the earlier order passed as well as the submissions addressed, it would appear that the initiation of proceedings under Section 148 of the Act was challenged solely on the ground of a notice referable to clause (b) of Section 148A of the Act having not been served upon the petitioner.

¶12

Pursuant to the liberty granted, Mr. Agrawal, learned counsel representing the respondents, has obtained instructions which have also been placed on our record.

¶13

From those instructions Mr. Agrawal points out that although the notice referable to clause (b) of Section 148A was returned undelivered, the order under Section 148A(d) of the Act was duly

¶14

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 22/05/2024 at 12:13:49

¶15

served upon the assessee at the same address. It is also his contention that the notice was issued at the address which was available on the PAN data base. Mr. Agrawal points out that no other alternate address or particulars had been provided by the petitioner.

¶16

In view of the aforesaid and bearing in mind the judgment of the Supreme Court in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai vs. I-Ven Interactive Ltd. [(2019) 10 SCC 13], we find no ground to interfere with the impugned proceedings.

¶17

Accordingly, while the writ petition fails, we leave it open to the writ petitioner to raise all other objections that may be otherwise permissible in law in the course of proceedings before the concerned Assessing Officer.

¶18

The writ petition along with pending applications stands dismissed.

¶19

YASHWANT VARMA, J

¶20

PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J

¶21

JANUARY 16, 2024/ kk

¶22

This is a digitally signed order.

¶23

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 22/05/2024 at 12:13:49

Satbir v. Income Tax Officer Ward 35(5) Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Satbir v. Income Tax Officer Ward 35(5) Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raghuvansh Prasad Singh Vs the Government Ofn.C.T. of Delhi and Ors.

Am Mining India Private Limited Vs Office of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1(1), Delhi & Ors.

M/S Steel Authority of India Limited (Sail) Vs Union of India & Anr.

Jk Tyre and Industries Ltd. Vs New Delhi Municipal Council & Ors.

Employees State Insurance Corporation Vs Dr. Rohini Pakhiddey

Subhojit Chatterjee Vs Union of India and Ors..

Shri Venkateshwar Constructions-Vdb Projectes (P) Ltd. (Jv) Vs Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, Govt of India

Ms Shivansh Associates Vs Ms Roop Raj Banquet Restro Bar and Ors.

Am Mining India Private Limited Vs Office of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1(1), Delhi & Ors.

Bunch Microtechnologies Private Limited Vs Income Tax Officer Ward 5 (1) Delhi and Anr.

Kosi Aviation Leasing Limited Earlier Known as Sky Aircraft Indian One Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors.

Mitsubishi Electric India Private Limited Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax Circle 16(1), Delhi & Ors.

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax - 8 Vs M/S. Srl Limited (Earlier Known as Super Religare Laboratories Ltd.)

Xchanging Technology Services India Private Limited Vs the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 25(1), New Delhi & Ors.