RIDDHI AGRO Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Invoking the writ appellate jurisdiction of this Court under Sec. 2 (1) of the Chhattisgarh High Court (Appeal to Division Bench) Act, 2006, the appellant herein calls in question legality, validity and correctness of judgment & order dtd. 8/5/2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPT No.122/2023 partly dismissing its writ petition and remanding the matter to the Assessing Officer for hearing and disposal afresh, in accordance with law.

(2.) The appellant herein had filed return of income for the assessment year 2016-17 on 30/9/2016 declaring its total income at Rs.13,53,820.00 and it was processed under Sec. 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the IT Act') and it had attained finality. However, the Assessing Officer decided to proceed under Sec. 148 of the IT Act and notice is said to be issued on 30-6- 2021, however, it was uploaded on the appellant's registered efiling account with the Income Tax Department on 3/7/2021. It is the case of the appellant that one year period has been extended by the notification issued by the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) (Central Board of Direct Taxes) on 27/4/2021 in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sec. (1) of Sec. 3 of the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020. Thereafter, as per the said notification, the due date for issuing notice under Sec. 148 read with Sec. 149(1)(a) of the IT Act for the assessment year 2016-17 was up to 30/6/2021, however, the Assessing Officer though claimed to have issued notice on 30/6/2021, but it was without Document Identification Number (DIN) and it was uploaded on the appellant's registered e-filing account with the Income Tax Department on 3-7- 2021, which is beyond the statutory period of limitation prescribed under Sec. 149(1)(b) of the IT Act prior to its amendment on 1- 4-2022 and therefore it was barred by limitation, and which the appellant opened on the Income Tax Business Application (ITBA) portal only on 4/7/2021, as such, the entire proceeding is without jurisdiction and without authority of law.

(3.) Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the time barred proceedings for reassessment under Sec. 148 of the IT Act, the appellant herein had preferred writ petition before the writ court questioning the said proceeding including notice on the ground that it was barred by limitation and further also that reasons / suggestions for escaped assessment were not given to the appellant herein, however, the learned Single Judge remanded the matter relying upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the matter of Union of India and others v. Ashish Agarwal,(2023) 1 SCC 617. but did not consider the ground that it was barred by limitation which led to filing of the instant writ appeal before the Division Bench of this Court on the ground that since the notice under Sec. 148 of the IT Act itself was barred by Sec. 149(1)(b) of the IT Act prior to its amendment, the writ petition deserves to be allowed in toto.