Case Law Details
Pawan Kumar Sharma Vs Union of India & Ors. (Calcutta High Court)
Introduction: The Calcutta High Court recently rendered a crucial judgment in the case of Pawan Kumar Sharma Vs Union of India, challenging the order dated April 6, 2023, under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner contested the assessment for the fiscal year 2019-2020, arguing a procedural irregularity in the issuance of notice under Section 148A(b) and the subsequent order.
Detailed Analysis: The petitioner’s contention centered around the violation of the statutory obligation to provide a clear seven days’ time to file a reply to the notice. Despite the apparent grant of seven days, the petitioner argued that the inclusion of three holidays within the period affected the actual time available. Citing the decision in Girdhar Gopal Dalmia Vs. Union Of India (2022) 141 taxmann.com 251 (Calcutta), the petitioner sought relief from the procedural flaw.
The Calcutta High Court, after considering the submissions, found merit in the petitioner’s argument. Acknowledging the reported decision, the court quashed the impugned order dated April 6, 2023, under Section 148A(b). The matter was remanded back to the Assessing Officer with a directive to pass a fresh speaking order. The Assessing Officer was instructed to afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or their authorized representative and consider the reply to the notice filed within two weeks.
The court set a deadline of four weeks from the receipt of the reply for the Assessing Officer to pass the fresh order under Section 148A(b). Additionally, a provision was made for the revival of the impugned order if the petitioner failed to submit the reply within the stipulated time.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
