Case Law Details
Jay Shree Tea And Industries Limited Vs ACIT (Calcutta High Court)
Introduction: The case of Jay Shree Tea And Industries Limited Vs ACIT (Calcutta High Court) raises a pertinent question regarding the delay in approaching the writ court and its impact on legal proceedings. The matter involves a writ petition against orders under sections 147 and 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act and highlights the significance of timely legal actions.
Analysis: The crux of this judgement revolves around the petitioner’s belated approach to the writ court and the resultant dismissal of the writ petition. Several key elements were observed:
1. Timeline of Events: The timeline of notices, participation in proceedings, and final assessment orders is crucial in understanding why the petition was dismissed.
2. Contesting the Order: The petitioner challenged the notice under Section 148A(b) but did not approach the court after subsequent orders and notices.
3. Legal Stance: The High Court’s stance of not interfering, considering the belated approach and the existence of an alternate remedy, was pivotal in the case.
Conclusion: The judgement in the case of Jay Shree Tea And Industries Limited Vs ACIT serves as a cautionary tale about the importance of timely intervention in legal matters. The petitioner’s delay in approaching the writ court led to the dismissal of the petition, emphasizing the necessity of prompt legal action. The ruling reiterates that legal remedies must be sought without unnecessary delays, and establishes a precedent that may influence similar cases in the future.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
The Court: Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties.
By this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the final assessment order under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 29th March, 2023 relating to assessment year 2013-14 after participating in the assessment proceeding from the very beginning by responding to the notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act which was issued on 27th May, 2022 by giving response/objection to the same and did not approach this Court after passing of the order under Section 148A(d) of the Act passed on 28th July, 2022 and even after issuance of subsequent notice under Section 148 of the Act. Petitioner has participated in the subsequent proceeding in which notice under Section 142(1) of the Act and 143(2) of the Act were issued and allowed the assessing officer to pass impugned final assessment order under Section 147 of the Act on 29th March, 2023 by filing this writ petition on 28th June, 2023 after the expiry of time to file appeal against the impugned assessment order. Now at this stage petitioner has filed this writ petition by challenging the notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act, dated 27th May, 2022 by contending that it is bad in law and without jurisdiction after participating in the proceeding and allowing the assessing officer to pass final assessment order which is an appealable under the statute.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the conduct of the petitioner in approaching this writ petition so belatedly after participating in the proceeding all throughout and that the impugned assessment order is an appealable order, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition and accordingly this writ petition being WPO 1340 of 2023 is dismissed.
Author Bio
This is a flawed judgement as the remedy of judicial flaw can be addressed at my time . Should be challenged