Facts of the
Case
The petitioner, Rakesh Suri, approached the Delhi
High Court by way of a writ petition and an accompanying stay application
alleging unnecessary harassment by the Income Tax Department. The grievance
arose from issuance of a notice dated 21.11.2025 under Section 142(1) of the
Income-tax Act, 1961, requiring the petitioner to file a return in respect of
PAN No. AOAPS6867H, whereas the petitioner had consistently been filing returns
under PAN No. ALYPS4529D.
The petitioner asserted that he was not using PAN
No. AOAPS6867H and had already submitted a reply dated 25.04.2024 requesting
the Assessing Officer to merge the two PANs. It was contended that since the
petitioner had never used the PAN bearing No. AOAPS6867H, he could not be
compelled to file a return under that PAN.
Issues
Involved
Whether assessment proceedings could be permitted
to continue despite discrepancy in PAN numbers, whether the petitioner could
resist compliance on the ground of non-use of one PAN, and whether directions
could be issued for cancellation of the duplicate PAN to avoid future
complications.
Petitioner’s
Arguments
The petitioner submitted that the notice under
Section 142(1) was erroneous as it sought compliance under a PAN which he was
not using. It was argued that the petitioner had already requested merger of
the PANs and that any assessment, addition or reassessment, if warranted, could
be carried out under the PAN actually being used by him. The petitioner
expressed willingness that any addition relatable to the unused PAN may be made
in his hands while completing assessment under the active PAN.
Respondent’s
Arguments
The Revenue did not seriously oppose continuation
of assessment proceedings and maintained that the Department should be allowed
to assess the petitioner in accordance with law, irrespective of PAN
discrepancies, so as to protect the interest of the Revenue.
Court Order
/ Findings
The Delhi High Court noted the petitioner’s
assertion that he was not using PAN No. AOAPS6867H and had already requested
merger of PANs. Accepting the pragmatic approach suggested by the petitioner,
the Court permitted the Assessing Officer to proceed with assessment
proceedings under Sections 148/143(3) of the Act, irrespective of either of the
PAN numbers reflected in any transaction.
The Court further made it clear that henceforth the
petitioner would not be permitted to raise any objection in relation to
proceedings initiated by the Department on the ground of PAN discrepancy. The
Court also directed the Assessing Officer or the authority issuing PANs to
forthwith cancel the petitioner’s PAN bearing No. AOAPS6867H.
In view of these directions, the Court disposed of
both the stay application and the writ petition.
Important
Clarification
The High Court clarified that the petitioner is
barred from raising any future objection relating to PAN discrepancy in respect
of assessment or reassessment proceedings. At the same time, the Revenue was
granted liberty to seek clarification or recall of the order if any grievance
still subsisted.
Final Outcome
The stay application and the writ petition were disposed
of. The Assessing Officer was permitted to proceed with assessment
proceedings against the petitioner irrespective of PAN discrepancy. The
authority concerned was directed to cancel the duplicate PAN No. AOAPS6867H
forthwith, and the petitioner was restrained from raising any further
objections on the ground of PAN-related issues.
Link to download order https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1769504110_RAKESHSURIVsASSISTANTCOMMISSIONEROFINCOMETAXORS..pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and
knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information
from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or
advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability
arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the
assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment