Neeraj Kukreja Vs ITO (Delhi High Court)
Summary: Delhi High Court, in Neeraj Kukreja Vs Income Tax Officer, examined a dispute arising from two PAN cards standing in the name of the petitioner. The petitioner asserted that he held only PAN AANPK4217G and had neither applied for nor acquired PAN AISPK7844C, nor used the latter for any transaction, including the transaction referred to in the impugned assessment order. The Income Tax Department, however, relied upon similarities between the particulars attached to the two PANs and contended that the petitioner himself could have obtained both PAN cards, also pointing to his receipt or knowledge of the notice under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the assessment order. The Department’s affidavit dated 08.05.2024 showed that both PANs carried the name “Shri Neeraj Kukreja” and father’s name “Shri Kashmiri Lal Kukreja”, while the dates of birth differed by one year—05.11.1975 and 05.11.1974—and the addresses were also not identical.
After examining the comparative particulars, the High Court observed that although there were similarities, there were also material dissimilarities. The Court stated that it failed to comprehend how and why the Department had issued two PAN cards to one person having a common name, the same father’s name and almost the same date of birth, particularly questioning how a PAN could have been allotted in the absence of proof of date of birth. Instead of finally deciding the controversy at this stage, the Court directed the Department’s counsel to produce the original records concerning both PANs, including the original application forms, supporting documents, mobile number and/or email ID used for verification, and directed the Assessing Officer to provide the 360-degree profile of both PAN cards.
As PAN AISPK7844C had been deactivated during Assessment Year 2018-19, the Assessing Officer was also directed to furnish the reasons for deactivation and a copy of any application that necessitated it. The matter was directed to be listed on 15.10.2026. Thus, the order is an interim evidentiary direction requiring the Department to establish from its original records the circumstances in which the disputed second PAN was issued and subsequently deactivated, rather than a final adjudication of the validity of the impugned assessment.
FULL TEXT OF THE DELHI HIGH COURT ORDER
1. In the present petition, it is the petitioner’s case that he holds only one PAN bearing no. AANPK4217G and that he has neither applied for nor acquired the PAN bearing no. AISPK7844C nor has he ever used the same to carry out any transaction much less the transaction mentioned in the impugned assessment order.
2. Per contra, Mr. Apoorv Agarwal, Junior Standing Counsel submitted that there are striking similarities in the details relating to these Permanent Account Numbers, and contended that it can be the petitioner only, who could get the PAN Cards issued in his name and the same is proved by the fact that he had not only received the notice under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 but also got information about the notice and the assessment order.
3. In support of his stand, Mr. Agarwal has taken the Court through the affidavit dated 08.05.2024 filed by the Income Tax Department (hereinafter referred to as ‘Department’), more particularly the comparative table with the details of both PAN numbers.
4. It will not be out of place to reproduce said table:
| PAN NO. | AANPK4217G | AISPK7844C |
|---|---|---|
| Name of the assessee | Shri Neeraj Kukreja | Shri Neeraj Kukreja |
| Father’s Name | Shri Kashmiri Lal Kukreja | Shri Kashmiri Lal Kukreja |
| Date of birth | 05.11.1975 | 05.11.1974 |
| Date of allotment | 24.12.1997 | 03.10.2002 |
| Office address | 33/1046, Nai Wala, Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110005 | Not mentioned |
| Residence address | C-114, Preet Vihar, New Delhi-110097 | 33/1646, Nai Wala, Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110005 |
5. After going through the affidavit and hearing learned counsel for the parties at some length, we are of the view that though there are similarities in so far as details/ data of the above-referred PAN Cards issued in petitioner’s name is concerned, but there are dissimilarities as well.
6. We fail to comprehend as to how and why the Department had issued two PAN Cards to one person – petitioner, having common name and same father’s name, with almost similar date of birth (same date and month, albeit with different year of birth). That apart, in absence of proof of date of birth, how could the Permanent Account Number be allotted and PAN Card issued.
7. Mr. Agarwal, learned Junior Standing Counsel is directed to produce the original record relating to the above-mentioned permanent account numbers viz. AANPK4217G and AISPK7844C, (when issued) – the original form and documents furnished at the time of getting the PAN Card issued, including the mobile number and/or email ID which was used for verification purposes. The Assessing Officer shall further provide 360` degree profile of both the PAN Cards.
8. During the course of the submissions, it has transpired that the PAN Card bearing number AISPK7844C was deactivated during the Assessment Year 2018-2019. It will therefore be required of the Assessing Officer to furnish the reason(s) of deactivation and copy of the application (if any filed), necessitating such deactivation.
9. List this case on 15.10.2026.
