Case Law Details

Case Name : Duo Meadows (P.) Ltd. Vs ITO (Karnataka High Court)
Appeal Number : Writ Petition No. 2320/2019
Date of Judgement/Order : 11/04/2019
Related Assessment Year : 2016-17
Courts : All High Courts (6000) Karnataka High Court (304)

Duo Meadows (P.) Ltd. Vs ITO (Karnataka High Court)

The petitioner has challenged the provisional attachment order dated 27.12.2018 passed  under Section 281B as well as the Assessment order dated 28.12.2018 passed under Section 143(3) and the consequential demand notice dated 28.12.2018 under Section 156 of the Income  Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’ for short).

2. The petitioner is a company engaged in the business of development of immovable properties, formation of layouts, sale of the sites/plots thereof. The petitioner was subjected to assessment under Section 143(3)of the Act relating to the assessment year 2016- 17. Before passing of the assessment order on 28.12.2018, an order dated 27.12.2018  was  passed under Section 281B of the Act attaching the properties belonging to the assessee in order to protect the interest of the revenue during the assessment proceedings.

3. It is the main grievance of the petitioner that the order under Section 281B of the Act is a non- speaking order and the same is void ab initio. As  regards the assessment order passed under Section 143(3) of the Act, the learned counsel for the petitioner would point out that the details of the development expenses and other direct expenses were furnished with the addresses and the PAN numbers of the persons to whom the payments were made. Ignoring the same, the Assessing Officer has observed that no addresses and PAN numbers have been furnished by the assessee except the names in support of the development expenses and direct expenses. The same discloses the non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer. It is contended that immediately after passing of the order under Section 281B of the Act on 27.12.2018, the next day e., on 28.12.2018 the assessment order has been passed. Thus, it is contended that the orders impugned herein being violative of the fundamental principles of law deserve to be set aside.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the revenue would submit that the factual aspects now pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner inasmuch as the list with addresses and PAN numbers with names found in the compromise account prima-facie does not tally and this aspect requires to be considered by the appellate authority. Hence, the petitioner may be relegated to the appellate forum. It is further submitted that the order passed under Section 281B of the Act has a short span of life  of six months and pursuant to the conclusion of the assessment proceedings, extension of the said order is ordinarily not contemplated. Hence, the challenge made to the said order does not survive for consideration.

5. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perusing the material on record, this Court is of the considered opinion that there is some force in the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the revenue as the assessment order is challenged   on the factual aspects in as much as the details  of names and PAN numbers said to have  been furnished by the assessee to whom the payments are made to establish the claim made, the same necessarily requires to be examined by the appellate authority,  the machinery provided under the Act. The question  of facts cannot be examined under the writ

6. Hence, the petitioner is relegated to the Appellate Forum to assail the assessment order impugned. If such an appeal is preferred within a period of three weeks from today, the same shall be considered by the Appellate Authority in accordance with law on merits without objecting to the aspect of limitation.

7. The order passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 281B of the Act has been ceased to have effect after the expiry of six months from the date of the order of the assessment. Hence, the  apprehension  of the petitioner regarding the enforcement of the provisional attachment further would not arise and the same can be allayed with a direction to the respondent- authorities that the said order shall not be  enforced  until a decision is to be taken by the Appellate Authority on the stay application, if to be filed in the appeal proceedings by the assessee within a period of three weeks as aforesaid and is ordered

With the aforesaid observations and directions,  the writ petition stands disposed of.

Download Judgment/Order

More Under Income Tax

One Comment

Leave a Comment

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

Search Posts by Date

October 2020