Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Triton Overseas Private Limited Vs Union of India (Calcutta High Court)
Appeal Number : WPO/726/2023
Date of Judgement/Order : 01/05/2023
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Triton Overseas Private Limited Vs Union of India (Calcutta High Court)

In Triton Overseas Private Limited vs. Union of India (Calcutta High Court), the petitioner challenged an order dated July 14, 2022, issued under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2017-18. The challenge was based on the claim that the assessing officer lacked jurisdiction because the order was issued without the required approval from the correct specified authority, as mandated by Section 151(ii) of the Act. The Court found that the approval had not been obtained from the appropriate authority and therefore quashed the impugned order and all subsequent proceedings. However, this quashing does not prevent the Income Tax Authorities from initiating fresh proceedings in compliance with the law and obtaining approval from the correct authority. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.

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 impugned order dated 14th July, 2022 under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 relating to assessment year 2017-18 by raising the pure question of law relating to the jurisdiction of the assessing officer concerned in passing the aforesaid impugned order by non-compliance of the formalities of taking approval of the specified authority mentioned in Section 151(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Admitted position in this case is that impugned order under Section 148A(d) of the Act has been passed after a lapse of three years from the end of the relevant assessment year and in this case specified authority is not the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax from whom approval has been taken before passing the aforesaid impugned order and it appears on a plain reading of Section 151(ii) of the said Act that Principal CIT from whom approval has been taken is not the specified authority for the purpose of approval under Section 148 and Section 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, submission of the parties and the aforesaid factual and legal position, the aforesaid impugned order under Section 148A(d) of the Act dated 14th July, 2022 and all subsequent proceedings are quashed.

However, quashing of the impugned notice and subsequent proceedings will not be a bar on the part of the Income Tax Authorities concerned to initiate any fresh proceeding in future in accordance with law after taking approval from appropriate ‘Specified Authority’.

In view of the discussion made above, this writ petition being WPO 726 of 2023 stands disposed of.

Sponsored

Author Bio

A Blogger by Passion and a Chartered Accountant by Profession. View Full Profile

My Published Posts

Legal Heir’s Challenge to Tax Recovery: Gujarat HC Ruling Supreme Court Ruling on CENVAT Credit for Telecom Towers and PFBs Bank Account Freezing by Customs Authorities Quashed: Rajasthan HC Ruling Punjab & Haryana HC on GST Fraud: IPC & CGST Act Prosecution High Court Allows GST Appeals Filed Beyond Limitation View More Published Posts

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930