The High Court of Bombay Nagpur Bench set aside order under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as reply filed by petitioner was not taken into consideration. The writ petition was filed by Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Khamgaon.
The challenge raised in the writ petition is to the order issued under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It is submitted by the Counsel for the petitioner that the notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act of 1961 and reply was sought from the petitioner on or before 31.03.2022. The petitioner submitted its reply on 31.03.2022 and on the same day the impugned order came to be passed on 10.41 p.m. after obtaining approval of the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax. According to the petitioner the impugned order does not consider the petitioner’s reply dated 31.03.2022.
Before passing the order under Section 148A(d) of the Act of 1961 it is necessary to obtain approval of the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax. The record indicates that such approval though stated to be obtained the impugned order has been passed at 10.41 p.m. This indicates that the reply filed by the petitioner to the notice has not been taken into consideration especially in view of the fact that such reply was filed on 31.03.2022.
A Coram consisting of Justice A S Chandurkar and M W Chandwani observed that “Given the aforesaid facts, we are of the view that the impugned order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act of 1961 has been issued without considering the petitioner’s reply inasmuch as paragraph 1 of the said order records that the petitioner failed to submit its explanation. In view of aforesaid the impugned order dated 31.03.2022 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act of 1961 is set aside.”
Deepak Gupta, appeared for the petitioner and Anand Parchure, appeared for the respondents.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
