MS Lokesh Construction P. Ltd Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax


Quick Summary
This Delhi High Court case, MS Lokesh Construction P. Ltd. vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, concerns a challenge to an assessment order dated 07.04.2021. The petitioner argued that the order was invalid as it was issued without a prior show cause notice-cum-draft assessment order. The court issued notice and, with the consent of both parties, took up the writ petition for final disposal.

Court :
Delhi High Court

Brief :
The prayer made in the captioned application is to grant exemption from filing requisite court-fee and sworn/notarised/affirmed affidavit. The captioned application is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to place on record the duly sworn/notarised/affirmed affidavit and to deposit the requisite court-fee, within three days of the resumption of the normal and usual work pattern by this court.

Citation :
W.P.(C) 5491/2021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 27.05.2021
W.P.(C) 5491/2021

MS LOKESH CONSTRUCTIONS P LTD .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Gagan Kumar with Mr. Ashish
Parashar, Advocates.

versus

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
..... Respondent

Through: Ms. Vibhooti Malhotra, Sr. Standing

Counsel.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH
[Court hearing convened via video-conferencing on account of COVID-19]

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.: (ORAL)

CM APPL. 17023/2021
1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions.

CM APPL. 17024/2021
2. The prayer made in the captioned application is to grant exemption from filing requisite court-fee and sworn/notarised/affirmed affidavit. The captioned application is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to place on record the duly sworn/notarised/affirmed affidavit and to deposit the requisite court-fee, within three days of the resumption of the normal and usual work pattern by this court.

W.P.(C) 5491/2021 and CM APPL. 17022/2021 [Application filed on behalf of petitioner, under Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, seeking stay on the operation of order passed by respondent, dated 07.04.2021.]

3. Via this writ petition, challenge has been laid to the assessment order dated 07.04.2021, passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’), as also the consequential notice of demand issued under Section 156 of the Act, and notice for initiation of penalty proceedings issued under Section 274 read with Section 270A of the Act.

4. To be noted, the impugned assessment order concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2018-2019.

5. The principal grievance of the petitioner is that, the impugned assessment order was passed without issuance of a show cause notice-cum draft-assessment order.

6. Issue notice.

7. Ms. Vibhooti Malhotra, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent/revenue.

7.1 Ms. Malhotra says that, in view of the directions that we propose to pass, she does not wish to file a reply and will argue the matter based on the record, presently, available with the Court.

7.2. Accordingly, with the consent of the counsel for the parties, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal.

8. At the outset, Ms. Malhotra, fairly, draws our attention to the 
judgement passed by this Court, today, in W.P. (C) 5552/2021 [listed on our board today as Item No. 28], the ratio of which, according to her, will apply,to this matter, as well.

To know more in details find the attachment file

FAQ :

The main issue was the petitioner's challenge to an assessment order issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, arguing it was made without a proper show cause notice.

The assessment order in question concerned Assessment Year 2018-2019.

MS Lokesh Construction challenged the assessment order dated 07.04.2021, a consequential notice of demand under Section 156, and a notice for penalty proceedings under Section 274 read with Section 270A of the Income Tax Act.

The court issued notice to the respondent/revenue, and the counsel accepted notice. The respondent indicated they would argue based on the existing record without filing a separate reply.

The application for exemption from filing court-fee was allowed, subject to exceptions, with a direction to the petitioner to submit the required affidavit and deposit the court-fee within three days of the court's normal working resumption.

 
downloaded 426 times



Judgement posted by

Guest

Comments




CCI Pro



Company
ARTICLESHIP 21 September 2026
CA Article Assistant

KK & Company Chartered Accountant

Pune

CA Inter

View Details
Company
08 October 2026
Accounts and Tax Associate

POOJA R TELI & CO

Pune

CA Inter

View Details
Company
18 September 2026
Accounts & Finance Specialist

ULTRA CHEMICAL WORKS

Thane

CA Final

View Details
Company
08 October 2026
Account Executive

Elite Taxation

New Delhi

CA Foundation

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 18 September 2026
Industrial Trainee

Twenty Point Nine Five Ventures Private Limited

Noida

CA Inter

View Details
Company
14 October 2026
Accountant

Rize.farm

Bengaluru

B.Com

View Details
Company
15 October 2026
Senior Accountant

Continental Belting Pvt Ltd

Mumbai

B.Com

View Details
Company
12 October 2026
Chartered Accountant - Internal Audit

HKC | Chartered Accountants & Business Advisors

Ludhiana

CA

View Details