Just 3 Days' Time Granted To Respond To The Income Tax Notice: Delhi High Court Remands The Matter Back To Assessing Officer After Setting Aside
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora has remanded the matter back to the assessing officer as just 3 days' time was granted to respond to the income tax notice.The petitioner/assessee has assailed the notice issued under Section 148A (b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the order passed under Section 148A (d) for the Assessment...
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora has remanded the matter back to the assessing officer as just 3 days' time was granted to respond to the income tax notice.
The petitioner/assessee has assailed the notice issued under Section 148A (b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the order passed under Section 148A (d) for the Assessment Year 2018–19.
The assessee contended that only three days' time was granted to the assessee to respond, as against the mandatory statutory period of at least seven days. Despite the fact that the annexure attached to the notice gave the petitioner eight days to respond, the e-filing submission portal was closed earlier, in violation of Section 148A (b) of the Income Tax Act.
The petitioner relied on the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Shri Sai Co-operative Thrift and Credit Society Ltd versus ITO. The Delhi High Court held that under Section 148A (b), a minimum time of seven days has to be granted to the assessee to file its reply to the show cause notice.
The respondent/department had no objections to the matter being returned to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision in accordance with the law.
The court set aside the order passed under Section 148A (d) for the Assessment Year 2018-19. The court directed the Assessing Officer to pass a fresh reasoned order in accordance with the law after considering the reply of the petitioner, which was directed to be filed within a week.
Case Title: Shubham Thakral Vs ITO
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 593
Counsel For Petitioner: Advocate Sumit Kumar Batra
Counsel For Respondent: Advocate Amrit Pradhan