Merger of PAN entries and duplicate PAN cancellation: assessment may proceed under Section 148/143(3) regardless of PAN used.

Merger of PAN entries and cancellation of duplicate PAN is addressed; the revenue may proceed with reassessment under income tax law (reopening and assessment) irrespective of which PAN appears in transactions, permitting the Assessing Officer to continue proceedings and precluding the taxpayer from raising objections to proceedings based on PAN identity. The tax authority or PAN issuing authority is directed to cancel the secondary PAN forthwith, and the taxpayer cannot resist assessment proceedings by asserting use of a different PAN.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the Assessing Officer may proceed with assessment/reassessment proceedings under Section 148/143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 against the taxpayer irrespective of differing PAN numbers recorded in transactions; (ii) Whether the Authority should be directed to cancel a PAN number not in use and whether the taxpayer should be precluded from raising objections in relation to proceedings initiated irrespective of PAN.

Issue (i): Whether the Assessing Officer may proceed with assessment/reassessment proceedings under Section 148/143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 against the taxpayer irrespective of differing PAN numbers recorded in transactions.

Analysis: The Court considered the petitioner's contention that notices issued in respect of a PAN not used by him led to harassment and his request to merge PAN numbers. The Court recorded the petitioner's concession that any addition found in respect of the other PAN may be made in his assessment and permitted the Assessing Officer to continue assessment or reassessment proceedings under Section 148/143(3) without being constrained by the particular PAN quoted in transactions.

Conclusion: The Assessing Officer is permitted to proceed with assessment/reassessment under Section 148/143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 against the taxpayer irrespective of the PAN number quoted in transactions. This conclusion is against the taxpayer's challenge and in favour of the Revenue.

Issue (ii): Whether the Authority should be directed to cancel a PAN number not in use and whether the taxpayer should be precluded from raising objections in relation to proceedings initiated irrespective of PAN.

Analysis: The Court directed that the unused PAN shall be cancelled by the Authority issuing PANs and recorded that henceforth the taxpayer will not be permitted to raise objections to proceedings initiated by the Department irrespective of the PAN number. The Court also left open a route for the Department to seek clarification or recall if any grievance remains.

Conclusion: The Authority is directed to cancel the unused PAN forthwith and the taxpayer is precluded from raising objections in relation to proceedings initiated by the Department irrespective of PAN. This conclusion is in favour of the Revenue.

Final Conclusion: The interim application is disposed of by permitting continuation of assessment/reassessment proceedings regardless of PAN discrepancies and directing cancellation of the unused PAN; the connected writ petition is disposed of in light of these directions.

Ratio Decidendi: Where duplicate or differing PAN entries exist, the tax authority may proceed with assessment or reassessment under Sections 148 and 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 against the taxpayer irrespective of the particular PAN quoted, and the Authority may cancel an unused PAN to prevent procedural multiplicity.

---