Case Law Details
Agrawal Petrolium Co. Vs PCIT (Madhya Pradesh High Court)
The main grievance put forth is that when petitioner received a notice under Section 148A(b) of Income Tax Act, the petitioner filed a reply on 15.03.2022 but the same was not considered by the respondent.
Learned counsel for the parties by placing reliance on para-3 and 6 of the Preliminary submissions filed on behalf of respondents jointly urged that indisputably petitioner’s reply escaped notice of the respondents while passing order under Section 148A(d) of Income Tax Act, 1961. It is agreed that impugned order dated 27.03.2022 (Annexure P/10) may be set side because of aforesaid procedural impropriety of not considering the reply and liberty may be reserved to the department to pass a fresh order in accordance with law after considering the reply.
In view of aforesaid stand of parties, the impugned order dated 27.03.2022 is set aside. Liberty is reserved to pass a fresh order in accordance with law after considering the reply. The consequential notice dated 29.03.2022 (Annexure P/11) is also set aside by reserving aforesaid liberty.
It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands allowed and disposed off.
