MANAB PAUL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties. By this Writ Petition, petitioner has prayed for relief of direction upon the respondent assessing Officer concerned prohibiting him from giving effect to the impugned enquiry notice under Sec. 148A(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dtd. 17/3/2023 which had already been given effect to long back and the subsequent show-cause notice issued under Sec. 148A(b) of the Act dtd. 22/3/2023 and the order passed under Sec. 148A(d) of the Act dtd. 25/4/2023 and subsequent notice under Sec. 148 of the Act dtd. 26/4/2023 and approached this writ Court at this stage after going on participating in the proceeding at every stage.

(2.) Facts as appears from records/documents annexed to the writ petition filed by the petitioner himself are as follows:

(3.) In the said case there was allegation of violation of principles of natural justice by not providing any opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and further in the said case the Assessing Officer had recorded that no response was submitted by the Assessing Officer while from record it had appeared that the petitioner had actually submitted response. Furthermore, in the said order no notice under Sec. 148A(a) of the Act was set aside. Petitioner has also relied on an unreported decision of the Hon'ble Patna High Court in the case of Alkem Laboratories Limited 'vs- Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1 (8343 of 2022). The said case is also distinguishable in the facts and circumstances of the present case since in the present case petitioner did not co-operate with the respondent Assessing Officer by not filing any response/reply to the notice of enquiry under Sec. 148A(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.