Allowed

Pinki Tour and Travels Ltd. v. Income Tax Department

Delhi HC1 Jul 2024W.P.(C)/8804/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition by granting two weeks for the petitioner to furnish additional information and evidence in response to a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, before the assessment is completed.

What did the court decide?

Two weeks to furnish additional information and evidence; assessment to be completed after affording opportunity of personal hearing.

Pinki Tour and Travels Ltd. Vs Income Tax Department — Income Tax | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~18

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 8804/2024 & CM APPL. 35821/2024 (Stay)

¶4

PINKI TOUR AND TRAVELS LTD ..... Petitioner

¶5

Through Mr. Chanderkant Tyagi and Mr. Amar Gupta, Advs.

¶6

versus

¶7

INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT ..... Respondent Through Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, SSC along with Mr. Anant Mann, Mr. Pratyaksh Gupta and Mr. Vikram Chand, JSCs.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

% 01.07.2024

¶12

CM APPL. 35822/2024 (Exemption)

¶13

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶14

Application stands disposed of.

¶15

W.P.(C) 8804/2024 & CM APPL. 35821/2024 (Stay )

¶16

The writ petitioner impugns the order dated 29 September 2023 referable to Section 148A(d) as well as the final notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [‘ Act ’] which came to be issued. 2. The principal grievance, apart from the other challenges which were raised, was with respect to additional information in respect of a sum of INR 91,28,044/- claimed as commission expenses and the proposed variation in respect thereof which came to be communicated to the petitioner on 25 September 2023.

¶17

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 03/07/2025 at 19:14:07

¶18

According to the writ petitioner, very little time was accorded to the assessee to respond to the notice and proceedings thereafter came to be closed and a final order passed on 29 September 2023 under Section 148A(d) of the Act.

¶19

The aforesaid aspect is liable to be appreciated additionally in light of the request which had been made on 26 September 2023 by the writ petitioner for being accorded further time to respond to the notice of 25 September 2023.

¶20

In our considered opinion, the end of justice would merit the assessee being accorded two weeks’ time to furnish all additional information and material that it may choose to rely upon in order to effectively answer the issues which stood raised in terms of the notice of 25 September 2023, since the assessment is yet to be completed. 6. In view of the aforesaid, we dispose of the writ petition at this stage, while leaving all rights and contentions of respective parties open, by providing that the writ petitioner would have two weeks from today to furnish all material and evidence that it may choose to rely upon while responding to the notice of 25 September 2023. Any such material that may be placed before the Assessing Officer shall be duly taken into consideration. The assessment may be now completed in accordance with law and after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the writ petitioner.

¶21

YASHWANT VARMA, J.

¶22

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J

¶23

JULY 01, 2024/ RW

¶24

Pinki Tour and Travels Ltd. v. Income Tax Department

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pinki Tour and Travels Ltd. v. Income Tax Department

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Avadaa Energy Private Limited Vs Central Transmission Utility of India Limited & Ors.

Ashish Garh and Anr. Vs Commissioner Municipalcorporation of Delhi

Gulshan Kumar and Ors. Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi through Its Commissioner and Ors.

Amit Kumar & Anr. Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Ashok Kinra Vs Central Cottage Industries Corporation and Ors.

Misha Textiles Private Limited (through Director) Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 17(1) Delhi & Ors.

Vesuvius India Limited Vs Steel Authority of India Limited & Anr.

Manav Mandir Mission Trust Vs Union of India & Ors.

Smt. Babita Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

M/S Om Gems and Jewellery Vs Principal Commissioner, Directorate of International Customs, Free Trade Agreements (Fta) Cell New

The Commissioner of Income Tax -Exemption Vs Sarv Hitkari Educational Society

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -7 Vs Shawnotel India Pvt. Ltd.

Commissioner of Income Tax International TAXATION-1, New Delhi Vs Goto Technologies Ireland Unlimited Company (Earlier Known as Logmein Ireland Unlimited Company)