Just a moment...

Report
FeedbackReport
Bars
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2023 (12) TMI 1134

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'Act') for the Assessment Years 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18 and further challenging the notices dated 25th July, 2022 issued under Section 148 of the Act. The petitioner further challenges the constitutional validity of Section 115BBE of the Act. 2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the notices issued under Section 148 of the Act have been issued after three years from the end of the relevant Assessment Years and that too could have been issued after obtaining the sanction from the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax and not from the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax as has been done in the present cases. 3. Learned counsel for the Respondents-Revenue, who appears on....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ure and not mandatory [Ref. CIT v/s P.K. Noorjahan - (1999) 237 ITR 670 (SC)] and because of that they are prone to the vice of perversity in exercise thereof. This may lead to a situation where similarly placed assessees may be subjected to differential treatment under the Act based on the discretion of the Assessing officer. The very section 115BBE is prone to mischief. It can be manifested by way of a simple illustration. Suppose two different assesses in the very same business earning the very same nature of income are assessed before the same Assessing Officer wherein income from business earned in cash is disclosed by both the Assessees. The said income is taxable u/s 28 of the Act. It needs to be mentioned that even incomes to which ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... unrealistic fashion or in a vacuum or on the ground that there is an apprehension of misuse of Statutory Provision or possibility of abuse of power. It must be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, that administration and application of a particular law would be done "not with an evil eye and unequal hand". In Maganlal Chhaganlal (P) Ltd. Vs. Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay & Ors., (1974) 2 SCC 402, the Supreme Court has held as under:- "15..... Administrative officers, no less than the courts, do not function in a vacuum. It would be extremely unreal to hold that an administrative officer would in taking proceedings for eviction of unauthorised occupants of Government property or Municipal property resort to the procedure pre....