TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (4) TMI 1569
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ocate, Income Tax Mr. Alok Kumar, Advocate. (In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2821 of 2022) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Rastogi, Sr. Advocate Ms. Smriti Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Archana Sinha @ Archana Shahi, Sr. Advocate, Income Tax Mr. Alok Kumar, Advocate. (In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2943 of 2022) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Rastogi, Sr. Advocate Ms. Smriti Singh, Advocate. For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Archana Sinha @ Archana Shahi, Sr. Advocate, Income Tax Mr. Alok Kumar, Advocate. (In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 3512 of 2022) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Rastogi, Sr. Advocate Ms. Smriti Singh, Advocate. For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Archana Sinha @ Archana Shahi, Sr. Advocate, Income Tax Mr. Alok Kumar, Advocate. (In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 3900 of 2022) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Rastogi, Sr. Advocate Ms. Smriti Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Archana Sinha @ Archana Shahi, Sr. Advocate, Income Tax Mr. Alok Kumar, Advocate. (PER: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI) Pursuant to earlier orders, Ms. Neha Singh, Deputy Commissioner of Income ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e change of opinion. ii) For issuance of an appropriate writ quashing the preliminary order dated 01.02.2022 passed in pursuance of the said Notice by National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi ((Respondent No. 3) herein and also referred to as the "NFAC" hereinafter) whereby the petitioner's objection on the issue of assumption of jurisdiction has been rejected by a non-speaking and cryptic order passed only as a formal observance of the procedure laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshaft (India) vs. ITO and Others reported I (2003) 259 ITR 19. iii) For issuance of an appropriate writ quashing the notice under section 143 (2) dated 23.11.2021 by which the Respondent No. 2 has assumed jurisdiction to assess / reassess the alleged escaped income. iv) For issuance of an appropriate writ quashing the notice under section 142 (1) dated 14.12.2021 by which the Respondent No. 3 has assumed jurisdiction to assess / reassess the alleged escaped income. v) For issuance of any other writ, order or direction which your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case." In CWJC No. 2943 of 2022 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....illegal and without jurisdiction as the notice has been issued beyond the limitation prescribed under Section 149 and the initiation is without recording any finding attributing failure on part of the petitioner in disclosing fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment and on mere change opinion. ii) For issuance of an appropriate writ quashing the notice under section 142 (1) dated 08.01.2022 by which the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [(Respondent No. 3) herein and also referred to as " NFAC" hereinafter)] has assumed jurisdiction to assess / reassess the alleged escaped income by requisitioning certain details which were requisitioned in course of original assessment culminated vide order under Section 143 (3) dated 30.07.2016. iii) For issuance of an appropriate writ quashing the notice cum clarification letter dated 25.01.2022 passed by NFAC whereby the petitioner has been required to submit documents as requisitioned vide notice u/s 142 (1). iv) For issuance of any other writ, order or direction which your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case." In CWJC No. 3900 of 2022 : ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and 41 as well as Kranti Associates Private Limited and Another vs Masood Ahmed Khan and Others reported in (2010) 9 SCC 496 in Paragraph 47 which reads as under :- "47. Summarising the above discussion, this Court holds: (a) In India the judicial trend has always been to record reasons, even in administrative decisions, if such decisions affect anyone prejudicially. (b) A quasi-judicial authority must record reasons in support of its conclusions. (c) Insistence on recording of reasons is meant to serve the wider principle of justice that justice must not only be done it must also appear to be done as well. (d) Recording of reasons also operates as a valid restraint on any possible arbitrary exercise of judicial and quasi-judicial or even administrative power. (e) Reasons reassure that discretion has been exercised by the decision-maker on relevant grounds and by disregarding extraneous considerations. (f) Reasons have virtually become as indispensable a component of a decision-making process as observing principles of natural justice by judicial, quasi-judicial and even by administrative bodies. (g) Reasons f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 3. The respondents-Income Tax Department are exercising quasi-judicial functions, therefore, they are liable to follow the aforementioned principle laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the present case, whether they have followed the aforementioned procedures or not, is to be apprised on the next date of hearing. Further to examine decision in the case of Nusli N. Wadia vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Another, reported in (2023) 16 SCC 677. 4. List this matter for further hearing on 22.04.2025." 4. It is necessary to reproduce impugned show cause notice (Annexure-1) which reads as under : "GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF FINANCE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DC/AC CIRCLE 4, PATNA To, Kishore Kumar Singh Sandalpur Sandalpur, Biscoman Colony Gulzarbagh 800007, Bihar India PAN: AGPPS2858F AY: 2016-17 Dated : 31/03/2021 DIN & Notice No : ITBA/AST/S/148/2020-21/1032077395(1) Notice Under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 Sir/Madam/ M/s, Whereas I have reasons to believe that your Income chargeable to Tax for the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h in the Hon'ble Supreme Court decision reported in (2023) 16 SCC 677. In the light of statutory provisions under Section 148 read with the aforementioned decisions, the respondent authorities need not assign the reasons in support of notice issued under Section 148 to the petitioners, therefore, petitioners have not made out a case so as to interfere with the impugned notice dated 31.03.2021. 8. Heard learned counsels for the respective parties. 9. Core issue involved in the present lis is whether official respondent while issuing notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 require to furnish reasons or not? The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that reasons are mandatory requirement to meet Article 14 of the Constitution of India otherwise petitioners are not in a position to submit their explanation in effective manner. It is also submitted that respondents while issuing notice under Section 148 are exercising quasi judicial functions, therefore, any quasi judicial action taken by the official respondent, it must be supported by reasons otherwise aggrieved person has no opportunity of submission of effective reply to the notice. 10. Learned counsel ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued and it should be provided within a period of four weeks from date of judgment and it has been affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court which is reported in (2023) 16 SCC 677. It is necessary to reproduce the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision and it reads as under : "1. The impugned order dated 7-1-2022, it has been rightly contended, is a non-speaking and cryptic order. However, we are not inclined to issue notice in the present special leave petition and leave it open to the petitioner to file return of income under protest within one month, without prejudice to the rights and contentions, and ask for the reasons for issue of notice under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The procedure as prescribed in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. CIT, would be followed by the assessing officer. In case of an adverse order, it will be open to the petitioner to challenge the same. 2. All contentions are left open. 3. In view of the aforesaid, the special leave petition is dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of." Reading of the aforementioned decision, it is crystal clear that notice must....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....C 505] the question squarely fell for consideration before a Bench of three learned Judges of this Court, viz., that although on account of the Forty-second Amendment of the Constitution, it was no longer necessary to issue a notice to the delinquent employee to show cause against the punishment proposed and, therefore, to furnish a copy of the enquiry officer's report along with the notice to make representation against the penalty, whether it was still necessary to furnish a copy of the report to him to enable him to make representation against the findings recorded against him in the report before the disciplinary authority took its own decision with regard to the guilt or otherwise of the employee by taking into consideration the said report. The Court held that whenever the enquiry officer is other than the disciplinary authority and the report of the enquiry officer holds the employee guilty of all or any of the charges with proposal for any punishment or not, the delinquent employee is entitled to a copy of the report to enable him to make a representation to the disciplinary authority against it and the non-furnishing of the report amounts to a violation of the rules of....