Tax Authority's Summons & Survey Validated, Writ Petition Dismissed. Appeal Upheld. No Cost Order.

Reckitt & Colman of India Ltd And Another. Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax (Tds) And Others.

Reckitt & Colman of India Ltd And Another. Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax (Tds) And Others. - [2001] 252 ITR 550, 172 CTR 499, 124 TAXMANN 496 Issues Involved:
1. Competence and jurisdiction of the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax (TDS) to issue summons u/s 131 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
2. Authority of TDS officer to issue notice u/s 131(1) when no proceeding is pending.
3. Validity of survey conducted u/s 133A of the Income-tax Act.
4. Maintainability of the writ petition in the presence of alternative remedies.

Summary:

1. Competence and Jurisdiction of the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax (TDS) to Issue Summons u/s 131 of the Income-tax Act, 1961:
The court examined whether the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax (TDS) had the authority to issue summons u/s 131. The appellants argued that the TDS officer lacked jurisdiction as no assessment proceedings were pending. The court referred to section 120 of the Income-tax Act, which allows the Chief Commissioner to confer jurisdiction on any officer. It was noted that the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax (TDS), Circle 21(2), Calcutta, was designated to handle TDS matters, including issuing summons u/s 131. The court concluded that the Assistant Commissioner had the jurisdiction to issue the summons.

2. Authority of TDS Officer to Issue Notice u/s 131(1) When No Proceeding is Pending:
The appellants contended that the TDS officer could not issue a summons u/s 131(1) without pending proceedings. The court referred to various definitions and interpretations of 'proceeding' and held that the pendency of proceedings is not an absolute requirement for issuing summons u/s 131. The court found that the information gathered during the survey constituted sufficient grounds for issuing the summons, making the action of the TDS officer valid and within jurisdiction.

3. Validity of Survey Conducted u/s 133A of the Income-tax Act:
The court examined the legality of the survey conducted on the appellant's premises u/s 133A. The appellants challenged the authority of the inspectors who conducted the survey. The court referred to section 133A and the relevant notifications, concluding that the inspectors were duly authorized to conduct the survey. The survey was deemed valid and conducted within the legal framework.

4. Maintainability of the Writ Petition in the Presence of Alternative Remedies:
The respondents raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the writ petition due to the availability of alternative remedies. The court cited several Supreme Court decisions, emphasizing that the existence of alternative remedies is not an absolute bar to the maintainability of a writ petition, especially when the authority's jurisdiction is in question. The court decided to adjudicate the matter on its merits, dismissing the preliminary objection.

Conclusion:
The court upheld the competence and jurisdiction of the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax (TDS) to issue summons u/s 131, validated the survey conducted u/s 133A, and dismissed the writ petition. The appeal was dismissed, and the judgment of the learned single judge was upheld. No order as to costs was made, and the prayer for a stay of the operation of the order was rejected.