ANUJ GHULIANI vs INCOME TAX OFFICER & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~84 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 2167/2025, CM APPL.Nos.10263/2025 & 10264/2025 ANUJ GHULIANI .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Nitin Kanwar, Advocate. versus INCOME TAX OFFICER & ANR. ....Respondents Through: Mr. Puneet Rai, SSC with Mr. Ashvini Kumar, Advocate and Mr. Rishabh Nangia, JSC. Date of decision: 19th February, 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA JUDGEMENT TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J : (ORAL) 1. Present writ petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing of the impugned notice dated 21.08.2024 issued under Section 148A (b) of the Income Tax Act (hereafter the ‘Act’); the impugned order dated 31.08.2024 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act; the impugned notice dated 31.08.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Act and other consequential proceedings. It also seeks quashing of the impugned approval of the specified authority dated 30.08.2024 issued under Section 151 of the Act. 2. It is the petitioner’s case that the the respondent no.1 issued a show cause notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act for Assessment Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 2167/2025 Page 1 of 3 By:VINOD KUMAR Signing Date:21.02.2025 15:34:31 Year (AY) 2018-19 to the petitioner on 21.08.2024, vide which, the Assessing Officer (AO) has given only five (5) days’ time to submit a response to the said notice, which is less than seven (7) days as specified under Section 148A(b) of the Act. It is stated that giving less time to the petitioner to file a reply not only violates provision of Section 148A(b) of the Act, but also violates principles of natural justice. 3. It is further stated that the petitioner approached the respondent personally to submit his reply under Section 148A(c) o