Amarjet Kaur v. The Income-tax Officer & Anr
[Citation -2020-LL-0207-114]

Citation 2020-LL-0207-114
Appellant Name Amarjet Kaur
Respondent Name The Income-tax Officer & Anr.
Court HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 07/02/2020
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags stay of demand
Bot Summary: The petitioner has assailed the assessment order dated 07.12.2019 passed by the Assessing Officer, ward 68(1), New Delhi. The petitioner also assails demand notices dated 07.12.2019 and 20.01.2020 passed the same AO. The petitioner also assails the order dated 30.01.2020, rejecting the stay of the demand and directing the petitioner to deposit 20 of entire demand drawn within 7 days. The case of the petitioner is that she and her husband, Mr. Jagtar Singh had made deposits with the Post Office. On the basis that the said amounts have been received as cash, which were not explained by the petitioner, the AO proceeded to make additions of Rs. 18,90,000/-. The petitioner has even procured a letter dated 18.12.2019 which was issued by the postal department, which clearly states that the said deposits were internal transfers and not deposits made in cash. In our view, the petitioner should not be subjected to harassment for pursuing her appeal. Set aside the assessment order dated 07.12.2019 and remand the matter to the AO for passing fresh assessment order after considering the relevant documents including the communication dated 18.12.2019 issued by the Office Of Sr. Superintendent of Post Offices, Delhi East Division, Delhi.


27 IN HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 1451/2020, CM APPL. 5022/2020 AMARJET KAUR Petitioner Through: Ms. Suruchi Agarwal, Adv. along with Ms. Arpana Majumdar, Adv. versus INCOME TAX OFFICER & ANR. Respondents Through: Mr. Sunil Agarwal, Sr. Standing counsel with Mr.Tushar Gupta and Mr. Akash Pratap Singh, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA ORDER 07.02.2020 CM APPL. 5022/2020 (exemption) 1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 2. application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) 1451/2020 & CM APPL. 5021/2020 (stay) 3. Issue notice. Learned counsel for respondents accepts notice. 4. We have heard learned counsel. 5. order that we propose to be pass today, in our view, does not call for reply. 6. present case represents exceptional situation which calls for exceptional approach. petitioner has assailed assessment order dated 07.12.2019 passed by Assessing Officer (AO), ward 68(1), New Delhi. petitioner also assails demand notices dated 07.12.2019 and 20.01.2020 passed same AO. petitioner also assails order dated 30.01.2020, rejecting stay of demand and directing petitioner to deposit 20% of entire demand drawn within 7 days. 7. case of petitioner is that she and her husband, Mr. Jagtar Singh had made deposits with Post Office. On maturity of said deposits, amounts were transferred in their two bank accounts and were shown as cash entries, though, they were bank transfers. On basis that said amounts have been received as cash, which were not explained by petitioner, AO proceeded to make additions of Rs. 18,90,000/-. This was despite fact that petitioner had explained position to AO that amounts had been received on maturity of deposits with Post Office under Monthly Income Scheme (MIS). petitioner has even procured letter dated 18.12.2019 which was issued by postal department, which clearly states that said deposits were internal transfers and not deposits made in cash. This communication was also marked to Income Tax Officer, Ward No. 68 (1), New Delhi. However, it appears that AO had already passed assessment order on 07.12.2019 i.e. before receipt of communication dated 18.12.2019. 8. In these circumstances, we are unable to appreciate as to how, firstly, AO could have rejected stay application. 9. In our view, petitioner should not be subjected to harassment for pursuing her appeal. We therefore, set aside assessment order dated 07.12.2019 and remand matter to AO for passing fresh assessment order after considering relevant documents including communication dated 18.12.2019 issued by Office Of Sr. Superintendent of Post Offices, Delhi East Division, Delhi. 10. Consequently, impugned demand notices are also set aside. appeal before CIT (A) has also become infructuous in view of above circumstances. 11. Copy of this order be given dasti under signature of Court Master. VIPIN SANGHI, J SANJEEV NARULA, J FEBRUARY 07, 2020 Pallavi Amarjet Kaur v. Income-tax Officer & Anr
Report Error