2022 (6) TMI 155 - HC - Income Tax

Court sets aside order, remands to Assessing Officer, grants petitioner liberty to reply, directs decision within 8 weeks.

M/s. Schneider Electric India Pvt. Ltd. Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 22 (2), Delhi And Anr.

The court set aside the impugned order and notice, remanding the matter back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision. The petitioner was granted ... Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - Notice issued under section 148A(b) - As submitted Petitioner did not have the opportunity to file a reply and the order under Section 148A(d) was not on merits, the Respondent has no objection if the matter is remanded back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision - HELD THAT:- Keeping in view the impugned order under Section 148A(d) and the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act dated 31st March, 2022 for the Assessment Year 2018-19 are set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision. The Petitioner is given liberty to file its additional reply to the show cause notice issued under Section 148A(b) of the Act within two weeks. The Assessing Officer is directed to decide the matter by way of a reasoned order in accordance with law within eight weeks thereafter. This Court clarifies that it has not commented on the merits of the controversy. Issues involved:Challenging show cause notice under Income Tax Act, violation of principles of natural justice, incorrect facts in the impugned order, remand for fresh decision.Analysis:The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging a show cause notice dated 15th March, 2022, issued under section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, an order dated 31st March, 2022 issued under Section 148A(d), and a notice dated 31st March, 2022 issued under section 148 of the Act for the Assessment Year 2018-19. The petitioner argued that the claim for IGST Refund, alleged to be incorrect by the respondent, should not be disallowed as it is not income chargeable to tax. The petitioner contended that the show cause notice was illegal under Section 147 of the Act and the first proviso to Section 148. Additionally, the petitioner raised concerns about the violation of principles of natural justice in the order dated 31st March, 2022, emphasizing that the petitioner was not given an opportunity to file a reply. The petitioner also pointed out that incorrect facts were recorded in the impugned order. The court issued notice on the matter.During the proceedings, the respondent acknowledged that the petitioner was not able to file a reply and that the order under Section 148A(d) was not based on merits. As a result, the respondent had no objection to remanding the matter back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision. The petitioner agreed to this course of action, stating that they would raise all submissions and contentions before the Assessing Officer by filing additional objections. Consequently, the court set aside the impugned order under Section 148A(d) and the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act dated 31st March, 2022 for the Assessment Year 2018-19, remanding the matter back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision. The petitioner was granted liberty to file an additional reply to the show cause notice within two weeks, and the Assessing Officer was directed to decide the matter within eight weeks thereafter by way of a reasoned order in accordance with the law. The court clarified that it did not comment on the merits of the controversy, leaving the rights and contentions of all parties open. Subsequently, the writ petition and application were disposed of as per the directions provided.