The Calcutta High Court has held that the rejection of objection against the re-assessment notice does not mean that the re-assessment is final and held that the assessee will get ample opportunity to defend his case throughout the proceedings.
The petitioner challenged a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner has filed objection against the impugned notice under Section 148 of the Act which has been considered and disposed of by order dated 15th March, 2022.
Justice Md Nizamuddin found that the impugned order of rejection was passed after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and elaborate discussion has been made in the impugned order of rejection of the objection against the aforesaid notice under Section 148 of the Act and the impugned order of rejection is a speaking one and has elaborate discussion.
“In exercise of Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction of this Court, this Court cannot act as an Appellate Authority and substitute the findings and reasoning given by the assessing officer in the impugned order of rejection. It is a well-settled principle of law that the Writ Court in exercise of judicial review it has to look only legality of the decision making process and not the decision itself. I do not find any procedural infirmity in passing the impugned order of rejection of the objection of the petitioner. In my view what the writ court is to look it as to whether prima facie there is some case for reopening of assessment under Section 147 of the Act for escapement of income in course of regular assessment and not the final conclusion of escapement of income at this stage, by the Assessing Officer,” the Court said.
Noting that this is not a case which falls in those categories where the impugned proceeding has been initiated by the authority having lack of inherent jurisdiction or there is any procedural infirmity or patent violation of natural justice or issue of constitutional validity of any statutory provision is involved, the Court held that “rejection of the petitioner’s objection against the impugned notice under Section 148 of the Act does not mean that it has become a final assessment order and demand has been raised against him. Petitioner will get ample opportunity in course of reassessment proceeding where procedure is like a regular assessment proceeding, to make out its case if according to him there is no escapement of income during regular assessment and for dropping the reassessment proceeding against it.”
DAR CREDIT AND CAPITAL Ltd vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
CITATION: 2022 TAXSCAN (HC) 236
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
