Seshasayee Paper and Boards Limited v. The DCIT, CC-II(1), Chennai / The ACIT, CC-II(1), Chennai / The JCIT (OSD), CC-II(1), Chennai / The ACIT, CC-II(1) (i/c), Chennai / The CIT, CC-II(1), Chennai
[Citation -2019-LL-1016-131]

Citation 2019-LL-1016-131
Appellant Name Seshasayee Paper and Boards Limited
Respondent Name The DCIT, CC-II(1), Chennai / The ACIT, CC-II(1), Chennai / The JCIT (OSD), CC-II(1), Chennai / The ACIT, CC-II(1) (i/c), Chennai / The CIT, CC-II(1), Chennai
Court HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 16/10/2019
Assessment Year 1999-00
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags reasons for reopening • escaped assessment • change of opinion • reopening of assessment • filing of objections
Bot Summary: 43902/2006 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records in AACCS 1192.G/4.S dated 29.03.2006 on the file of the third respondent and quash the same. 29882/2007 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records in PAN AACCS 1192G/ Central Circle II(1) dated 23.07.2007 of the first respondent relating to the Assessment Year 2001-02 and quash the same. 29884/2007 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records in PAN AACCS 1192G/ Central Circle II(1) dated 23.07.2007 of the first respondent relating to the Assessment Year 2002-03 and quash the same. 43902 of 2006, 29882 29884 of 2007 For Petitioner : Mr.M.P.Senthil Kumar For Respondents : Mr.A.P.Srinivas Senior Standing Counsel COMMON ORDER These three writ petitions are filed challenging the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, proposing to reopen the Assessment relevant to Assessment Years 1999-2000, 2001-2002 and 2002-2003, by contending that the petitioner's income assessable/chargeable to tax has escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The contentions of the petitioner in these writ petitions questioning the impugned notice issued under Section 148, are on several grounds, which include that the notice impugned was issued on mere change of opinion and that the same was issued beyond the period of four years. The contention of the learned senior standing counsel appearing for the Revenue/Respondents is that even before that stage has reached, the petitioner has approached this Court and filed the present writ petitions. Without expressing any view on the merits of the contentions raised by the petitioner against the impugned notice, these writ petitions are disposed of, by granting liberty to the petitioner to give objections to the reasons for reopening, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.


W.P.Nos.43902 of 2006, 29882 & 29884 of 2007 IN HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 16.10.2019 CORAM HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAVICHANDRABAABU W.P.Nos.43902 of 2006, 29882 & 29884 of 2007 Seshasayee Paper and Boards Limited, Represented by its Director (Finance) & Secretary, Sri V.Pichai Pallipalayam, Cauvery R.S.P.O., Erode 638007. Petitioner in all WPs Vs. Respondents in WP.No.43902/2006 1. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle II (1), 108, Uthamar Gandhi Road, Chennai 600034. 2. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle II (1), 108, Uthamar Gandhi Road, Chennai 600034. 3. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), Central Circle II (1), 108, Uthamar Gandhi Road, Chennai 600034. 4. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle II (1) (i/c), 108, Uthamar Gandhi Road, Chennai 600034. http://www.judis.nic.in 1/8 W.P.Nos.43902 of 2006, 29882 & 29884 of 2007 5. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle II (1), 108, Uthamar Gandhi Road, Chennai 600034. Respondents in WP.Nos.29882 & 29884 of 2007 1. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle II (1) (i/c), 46, Uthamar Gandhi Road, Chennai 600034. 2. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle II, 46, Uthamar Gandhi Road, Chennai 600034. Prayer in WP.No.43902/2006 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of Certiorari to call for records in AACCS 1192.G/4.S dated 29.03.2006 on file of third respondent and quash same. Prayer in WP.No.29882/2007 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of Certiorari to call for records in PAN AACCS 1192G/ Central Circle II(1) dated 23.07.2007 of first respondent relating to Assessment Year 2001-02 and quash same. Prayer in WP.No.29884/2007 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of Certiorari to call for records in PAN AACCS 1192G/ Central Circle II(1) dated 23.07.2007 of first respondent relating to Assessment Year 2002-03 and quash same. http://www.judis.nic.in 2/8 W.P.Nos.43902 of 2006, 29882 & 29884 of 2007 For Petitioner : Mr.M.P.Senthil Kumar For Respondents : Mr.A.P.Srinivas Senior Standing Counsel COMMON ORDER These three writ petitions are filed challenging notice issued under Section 148 of Income Tax Act, 1961, proposing to reopen Assessment relevant to Assessment Years 1999-2000, 2001-2002 and 2002-2003, by contending that petitioner's income assessable/chargeable to tax has escaped assessment within meaning of Section 147 of Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. contentions of petitioner in these writ petitions questioning impugned notice issued under Section 148, are on several grounds, which include that notice impugned was issued on mere change of opinion and that same was issued beyond period of four years. 3. Mr.M.P.Senthil Kumar, learned counsel appearing for petitioner contended that in view of grounds raised in these http://www.judis.nic.in 3/8 W.P.Nos.43902 of 2006, 29882 & 29884 of 2007 writ petitions, this Court can interfere with impugned notice and set aside same. 4. On other hand, Mr.A.P.Srinivas, learned senior standing counsel for Revenue/Respondents contended that in view of decision made by Apex Court in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer & others reported in (2003) 259 ITR 0019 , challenge made by petitioner before this Court, even at stage of issuance of Section 148 is not maintainable, as it is for petitioner to make objections to reasons for reopening. He further submitted that petitioner was already furnished with reasons for reopening and therefore, it is for them to make objections and thereafter, to allow Assessing Officer to pass orders on such objections, as observed in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer & others case. 5. Therefore, contention of learned senior standing counsel appearing for Revenue/Respondents is that even before that stage has reached, petitioner has approached this Court and filed present writ petitions. http://www.judis.nic.in 4/8 W.P.Nos.43902 of 2006, 29882 & 29884 of 2007 6. Heard both sides. 7. No doubt, petitioner has raised several contentions touching upon merits of notice issued under Section 148 including limitation and also by contending that it is based on change of opinion. But I am of view that these contentions cannot be considered at this stage now, since petitioner is bound to give objections to reasons for reopening and thereafter, Assessing Officer has to pass reasoned order, as observed by Apex Court in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer & others case. When such course of action is yet to be completed, I do not think that these writ petitions at this stage can be maintained any further. Therefore, without expressing any view on merits of contentions raised by petitioner against impugned notice, these writ petitions are disposed of, by granting liberty to petitioner to give objections to reasons for reopening, within period of four weeks from date of receipt of copy of this order. On receipt of such objections, Assessing Officer shall consider same and pass reasoned order, within period of four weeks thereafter. http://www.judis.nic.in 5/8 W.P.Nos.43902 of 2006, 29882 & 29884 of 2007 Based on order to be passed by Assessing Officer, it is for parties to workout their further course of action in accordance with law, thereafter. No costs. 16.10.2019 Speaking/Non Speaking Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No sni To 1. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle II (1), 108, Uthamar Gandhi Road, Chennai 600034. 2. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle II (1), 108, Uthamar Gandhi Road, Chennai 600034. 3. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), Central Circle II (1), 108, Uthamar Gandhi Road, Chennai 600034. http://www.judis.nic.in 6/8 W.P.Nos.43902 of 2006, 29882 & 29884 of 2007 4. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle II (1) (i/c), 108, Uthamar Gandhi Road, Chennai 600034. 5. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle II (1), 108, Uthamar Gandhi Road, Chennai 600034. 6. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle II (1) (i/c), 46, Uthamar Gandhi Road, Chennai 600034. 7. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle II, 46, Uthamar Gandhi Road, Chennai 600034. http://www.judis.nic.in 7/8 W.P.Nos.43902 of 2006, 29882 & 29884 of 2007 K.RAVICHANDRABAABU,J. sni W.P.Nos.43902 of 2006, 29882 & 29884 of 2007 16.10.2019 http://www.judis.nic.in 8/8 Seshasayee Paper and Boards Limited v. DCIT, CC-II(1), Chennai / ACIT, CC-II(1), Chennai / JCIT (OSD), CC-II(1), Chennai / ACIT, CC-II(1) (i/c), Chennai / CIT, CC-II(1), Chennai
Report Error