Case Law Details
Mortex India Private Limited Vs ACIT (Calcutta High Court)
In the case of Mortex India Private Limited vs. ACIT, the Calcutta High Court has stayed the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, until the final resolution of the writ petition. Mortex India Pvt. Ltd. filed the writ petition challenging the notice dated August 30, 2024, for the assessment year 2018-19, issued by the jurisdictional assessing officer. The petitioner argued that the notice was issued in violation of the provisions outlined in Section 151A of the Income Tax Act and the scheme notified on March 29, 2022. Additionally, the petitioner contested the approval granted under Section 151, stating that it was perverse and failed to consider the petitioner’s response to the Section 148A(b) notice.
The Court, after hearing both parties, acknowledged the jurisdictional issue raised by the petitioner. The petitioner referred to the judgment in Girdhar Gopal Dalmia vs. Union of India, where the Court had stayed a similar notice under Section 148. In light of the prima facie case and this precedent, the Court decided to stay any further action on the notice until the writ petition is resolved. The respondents were granted eight weeks to file their affidavit-in-opposition, with a four-week period for the petitioner to reply thereafter. The Court allowed liberty to mention the matter once the exchange of affidavits is completed.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Challenging the issuance of a Notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) dated 30th August, 2024 for the assessment year 2018-19, the instant writ petition has been filed on the ground that the same has been issued by the jurisdictional assessing officer in contravention of the provisions contained in Section 151A of the said Act read with the scheme as referred to thereunder, notified on 29th March, 2022.
2. The petitioner also questions the approval granted under Section 151 of the said Act dated 29th August, 2024 for the assessment year 2018-19 on the ground that the same is perverse and does not take into consideration the response given by the petitioner to the notice issued under Section 148A(b) of the said Act.
3. Das De, learned Advocate enters appearance on behalf of the respondents. She prays for leave to use affidavit-in-opposition.
4. Since the above writ petition raises a jurisdictional issue, the same shall be heard. Let affidavit-in-opposition to the present writ petition be filed within a period of eight weeks after the annual vacation; reply, if any, thereto be filed within four weeks thereafter.
5. Taking into consideration the prima facie case as has been made out by the petitioner and the judgement of the Division Bench of this Court presided over by the Hon’ble the Chief Justice in the case of Girdhar Gopal Dalmia vs. Union of India & Ors., in MAT/1690/2023 on 25th September, 2023, whereby the Hon’ble Division Bench while considering the competence of the jurisdictional assessing officer to issue a notice under Section 148 of the said Act, consequent upon publication of the Scheme vide Notification dated 29th March, 2022, and while admitting the appeal had stayed the said notice, I am of the view that no further steps should be taken by the respondents on the basis of the notice issued under Section 148 of the said Act dated 30th August, 2024 for assessment year 2018-19 till the disposal of the writ petition.
6. Liberty to mention upon expiry of the period for exchange of affidavits.
Author Bio
