The Delhi High Court directed the Income Tax Department to grant documents to the petitioner, Priyanka Saraswat Dev, in the matter of income tax demand of Rs. 436 crores raised without granting adequate opportunity.
The present writ petition has been filed challenging the assessment orders dated 06th March, 2013 passed by the Respondents under Section 144 read with Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Years 2005-06 to 2011-12 and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom.
In the alternative, the Petitioner sought directions remanding the appeal preferred by the petitioner before respondent No.2 to be taken on record for adjudication on merits without mandatory pre-deposit and for staying the operation of the impugned orders till the disposal of appeal by Respondent No.2.
The counsel for the Petitioner stated that an unreasonably high demand of Rs. 436 crores have been raised without granting adequate opportunity to the petitioner. It was also stated that initially the notices were not served upon the Petitioner and when they were served in the jail, the Petitioner was moved out to other jails at different locations other than Tihar Jail and that the Petitioner was in Judicial custody and had no means to adequately defend himself.
The Delhi High Court disposed of an interlocutory application, i.e., CM No. 45193/2023 preferred in W.P.(C) 4649/2022, whereby certain additional directions have been issued in favour of the petitioner’s husband, i.e., Ulhas Prabhakar Khaire Alias Sh. Lokeshwar Dev.
The Court noted that “However, having regard to the fact that the petitioner and his spouse have been in custody for a very long time and it is claimed that they do not have funds to progress their legal rights to contest the demands made against them by the respondent/revenue which runs into Rs.436 crores [as noticed by the coordinate Bench in its order dated 23.03.2022], we are of the view that the respondents/revenue should make the documents available to the petitioner at their own cost.”
A Division Bench of Justices Rajiv Shakdher and Girish Kathpalia observed that “Ruchir Bhatia, senior standing counsel, who appears on behalf of respondent/revenue, says that the directions contained in the order dated 23.03.2022 passed in W.P.(C) 4649/2022 and the order passed in CM No. 45193/2023 filed in W.P.(C) 4649/2022 can be applied mutatis mutandis to this writ petition as well.”
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
