Vindya Agencies Private Limited v ACIT (Calcutta High Court)

In the case of Vindya Agencies Private Limited v. ACITthe Calcutta High Court has issued a stay of a notice issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, dated April 22, 2024, in respect of the assessment year 2017-18. The petitioner challenged the legality of this notice, arguing that it was issued by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer in violation of section 151A of the Income Tax Act and the related scheme notified on March 29 2022. The petitioner contended that the approval granted under Section 151 was erroneous and did not adequately consider their response to the notice under Section 148A(b).

During the proceedings, Mr. Mitra, representing the respondents, sought leave to file an affidavit in opposition. The Court recognized the jurisdictional issues raised in the Writ Petition and scheduled a hearing, allowing respondents eight weeks to file their affidavit of opposition after the annual vacation, with a four-week deadline for any response from petitioner. Considering the prima facie case presented by the petitioner and referring to a previous judgment regarding the jurisdictional authority to issue such opinions, the Court determined that no further action should be taken based on the opinion of the April 22 until the writ petition is resolved. The Court granted the petitioner liberty to mention the matter after the exchange of affidavits, emphasizing the importance of following procedural guidelines in the context of income tax.

FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF THE CALCUTTA HIGH COURT

Challenging the issuance of notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) dated 22ⁿof April 2024 for the assessment year 2017-18, the present writ petition has been filed on the ground that it was issued by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer in violation of the provisions contained in Section 151A of said law read with the regime. as mentioned below, notified on 29^th March 2022.

2. The petitioner also questions the approval granted under Article 151 of the said law of 22^sd April 2024 for the assessment year 2017-18 on the ground that the same is perverse and does not take into consideration the response given by the petitioner to the notice issued under section 148A(b) of the said Act.

3. Mr. Mitra, learned counsel, appears on behalf of the respondents. He requests permission to use an affidavit of opposition.

4. Since the above application raises a question of jurisdiction, the same will be heard. That the affidavit of opposition to the present writ petition be filed within eight weeks after the annual vacation; the response, if applicable, will be filed within the following four weeks.

5. Taking into consideration the prima facie case as presented by the petitioner and the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court presided over by the Hon’ble Chief Justice in the case of Girdhar Gopal Dalmia v. Union of India & Ors., in MAT/1690/2023 on 25^th September 2023, whereby the Hon’ble Division Bench, while considering the jurisdiction of the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, to issue notice under section 148 of the said Act, following publication of the plan vide notification dated from 29^th March 2022, and while accepting that the appeal had stayed the said notice, I am of the view that no further action should be taken by the respondents on the basis of the notice issued under section 148 of the said law dated 22^sd April 2024 for assessment year 2017-18 till disposal of the writ petition.

6. Freedom to mention when the time limit for exchange of affidavits has expired.