ID: F2J-C-2568 Court: Calcutta High Court Case number: WPO/2470/2022 Decision date: 2022-09-13 Outcome: OPERATIVE_ORDER_REVIEW_REQUIRED
Finin2min decision brief
Calcutta High Court ruling in WPO/2470/2022. Read the complete court text for the operative result and fact-specific directions.
Why this ruling matters
This page provides the complete searchable court text, source provenance and operative-order context for a current income-tax ruling. Application depends on the assessment year, statutory text and binding jurisdiction.
Editorial control: The complete court text below controls. Later appellate history is marked CHECK_REQUIRED and has not been inferred.
[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Calcutta High Court
Ruchi Dalmia vs Income Tax Officer on 13 September, 2022
Author: Md. Nizamuddin
Bench: Md. Nizamuddin
OD -3
ORDER SHEET
WPO/2470/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
ORIGINAL SIDE
RUCHI DALMIA
VS
INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 33(1), KOLKATA AND ORS.
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE MD. NIZAMUDDIN
Date: 13th September, 2022.
Appearance:
Mr. Saurabh Bagaria, Adv.
Mr. Indranil Banerjee, Adv.
Mr. Subrata Mukherjee, Adv.
...For the Petitioner
Mr. Vipul Kundalia, Adv.
Mr. Anurag Roy, Adv.
...For the Respondents
The Court: Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. By this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 26th July, 2022 under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 relating to assessment year 2016-17 being annexure P-10 to the writ petition.
I have perused the aforesaid impugned order and find the same neither in violation of principle of natural justice nor contrary to any statutory provision nor there is any procedural irregularity nor without jurisdiction. I am of the view that once an order has been passed after observing formalities required under the law in issuing notice under Section 148A(b), giving opportunity of hearing to file an objection to the same and after that if the order has been passed by the assessing officer under Section 148A(d) of the Act and if the assessee petitioner is not satisfied with the reasoning given in such order and has any grievance on merit of the same, 2 he may agitate the same in course of subsequent proceedings after notice under Section 148 of the Act as per view taken by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its order dated 2nd September, 2022 in the case of Anshul Jain vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 14823/2022.
Furthermore an order under Section 148 (d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, itself is neither an assessment nor a demand and petitioner still will have ample scope and opportunity to make out a case if any for dropping of the proceeding under Section 147 of the Act in subsequent proceeding after the order passed under Section 148 (d) of the Act.
In view of reasoning and discussion made above this Writ Petition being WPO No. 2470 of 2022 is dismissed.
(MD. NIZAMUDDIN, J.) TR/
Practitioner verification checklist
Confirm the assessment year and the statutory version considered.
Separate the binding ratio from fact-specific findings and procedural directions.
Check territorial jurisdiction, appealability and any later stay, review or reversal.
Reconcile cited sections and monetary thresholds with the law applicable to the user’s period.
Questions answered
What did the court decide?
Calcutta High Court ruling in WPO/2470/2022. Read the complete court text for the operative result and fact-specific directions.
Which case and court does this page cover?
WPO/2470/2022, decided by Calcutta High Court on 2022-09-13.
Is the complete judgment available?
Yes. The complete searchable public court text appears on this page and in the downloadable local reference PDF.
What should be checked before relying on this ruling?
Verify the assessment year, applicable statutory text, territorial and appellate jurisdiction, and any later appeal, review, stay or contrary binding authority.