Case Law Details
Smt. Rama Gupta Vs DCIT (Rajasthan High Court)
In a significant ruling, the Rajasthan High Court addressed the participation in reassessment proceedings under the Income Tax Act, 1961, in the case of Smt. Rama Gupta vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (DCIT). The court examined the circumstances under which a petitioner who engages in reassessment proceedings can challenge the notice under Section 148 of the Act.
The crux of the case revolves around the reassessment notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on March 28, 2023. The petitioner, Smt. Rama Gupta, participated in the reassessment proceedings without initially challenging the notice. It was only after the reassessment order was passed that the petitioner filed a writ petition challenging both the notice and the reassessment order.
The court’s analysis began with the observation that the petitioner did not take any immediate legal remedy against the notice issued under Section 148. Participation in the reassessment proceedings without raising an initial objection indicated acceptance of the process to some extent. The petitioner sought to invoke the writ jurisdiction of the court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India post facto, which the court was not inclined to entertain.
The respondent’s counsel argued that since the petitioner did not challenge the notice at the appropriate time and chose to participate in the reassessment proceedings, the appropriate course of action would be to pursue remedies through the appellate authorities as provided under the law. The court found this argument persuasive, noting that the statutory remedy was available and appropriate in this case.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
