Alken Laboratories Ltd. vs Commissioner of Income Tax and Another

This petition has been filed, in effect, to seek a writ of mandamus restraining the Income Tax authorities from proceeding further in pursuance of the notice u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. .

The contentions before the court on behalf of the assessee have been two fold, one, that there is no jurisdiction in the assessing authority to issue a notice u/s 143(2) of the Act, and, secondly, there is no material on the basis of which this notice could be based.

Clearly, one aspect which the court does not desire to record is the merits on whatever be the controversy.

The issue seems to be excited more than is necessary. The first of the notices which was issued was dated October 3, 2001, annexure 2. Thereafter, in reply the assessee challenged the authority, Income Tax Officer Ward 2(1), Patna, for having taken out a notice in reference to a newspaper cutting on an assurance given by the Central Board of Direct Taxes as was published in Hindustan Times, New Delhi, October 29, 2000. A copy of the newspaper cutting was appended, and a copy of the reply was endorsed to the Chief Commissioner of income tax-1, Patna, the Commissioner of income tax-1, Patna, the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range 2, Patna, the Secretary, Bihar Income Tax Bar Association, Patna, and Patna Taxation Bar Association, Patna.

Thereafter, the assessee received another notice on January 4, 2002, annexure 5. The contents of the notice is as below :

"This is to inform you that your case has been taken up for scrutiny as per the Board''s instructions to verify the correctness of deduction claimed under Chapter VI-A."

In so far as the notice dated January 4, 2002, is concerned, now it was being indicated to the assessee that such of the deductions which may have been claimed under Chapter VI-A are being scrutinised as per the Board''s instructions to verify the correctness of the deductions. The court will not go into the aspect of deductions, as claimed in the returns, but the deductions were u/s 80G, deduction in respect of donations to certain funds, charitable institutions, etc, ; u/s 80HHC of deduction in respect of profits retained for export business, and u/s 80IB deduction in respect of profits and gains from certain industrial undertakings other than infrastructure development undertakings.

In so far as the notice is concerned, this court cannot hold that there is no jurisdiction in the Income Tax Officer to give notice. In so far as the clarifications on which the notice was given are concerned it has been sufficiently indicated in the notice. The court is not inclined to interfere on the notice.

Dismissed.