Case Law Details
Suraj Singh Vs ITO (Calcutta High Court)
Introduction: The case of Suraj Singh vs ITO, heard at the Calcutta High Court, revolves around the issuance of a notice under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, without obtaining approval from the “specified authority” under Section 151. The petitioner challenges the subsequent order under Section 148A(d) for the assessment year 2019-2020.
Detailed Analysis: The crux of the matter is whether approval from the “specified authority” is mandatory for issuing a notice under Section 148A(b). The court interprets Section 151 and concludes that, based on a plain reading of the provisions, approval is not required for the issuance of such notices. The judgment emphasizes that a notice under Section 148A(b) does not qualify as an order, and hence, Section 151 approval is not a prerequisite.
Furthermore, the court notes that the impugned order under Section 148A(d) is not a final assessment order, and any concerns raised by the petitioner can be addressed in subsequent proceedings. The petitioner is granted the liberty to present their case during the ongoing proceedings.
Conclusion: The Calcutta High Court dismisses the writ petition, affirming that approval from the “specified authority” is not necessary for issuing a notice under Section 148A(b). The judgment emphasizes the distinction between a notice and a final assessment order. The petitioner is advised to address any concerns during the subsequent proceedings related to the order under Section 148A(d).
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties.
By this writ petition petitioner has challenged the impugned order under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 22nd March, 2023 relating to assessment year 2019-2020 on the ground that the notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act dated 1st March, 2023 was issued without taking approval from the “specified authority” under Section 151 of the Act.
On plain reading of provisions of Section 151 of the Act it appears that for passing any order under Section 148A of the Act an approval from the “specified authority” as described in Section 151 of the Act has to be taken but by no stretch of imagination it can be interpreted in a way that a notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act is also an order and as such I am of the considered view that before issuance of notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act no approval from “specified authority” is required under Section 151 of the Act.
Furthermore, for the reason that the impugned order under Section 148A(d) of the Act is neither a final assessment order nor any demand arises out of it and petitioner has ample opportunity to make a case if it has in its favour, in course of proceeding subsequent to the order under Section 148A(d) of the Act for dropping the proceedings, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. This writ petition being WPA 12983 of 2023 is disposed of by only granting liberty to the petitioner to raise any point of merit of the re-assessment before the assessing officer in course of the proceeding subsequent to the order under Section 148A(d) of the Act.
With this observation and direction this writ petition stands disposed of.
Author Bio
