SHEKHAR B.SARAF,J. - (1.) This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner is aggrieved by an assessment order dated December 29, 2019 passed by the income tax department and subsequent demand notice under Section 156 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act"). The writ petitioner is also aggrieved by an attachment notice that was issued under Section 281B of the Act prior to passing of the assessment order.
(2.) Mr. Ratnanko Banerji, Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that notice for assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act was issued on August 13, 2018 for the Assessment Year 2017- 18. During the assessment hearings, several queries were raised upon the assessee petitioner wherein the assessee furnished its reply on December 5, 2019. Upon perusal of the response of the assessee, notice was issued under Section 142(1) on December 12, 2019. To the said notice, the assessee furnished a reply on December 19, 2019. On the basis of the said reply, a show-cause notice was issued on the assessee on 25th December, 2019. It is to be noted that in the earlier show-cause notice, taxability of a sum of Rs.75.4 crore had been raised under Section 28(iv) of the Act. Subsequently, the notice issued on December 25, 2019 stated that the amount of Rs.75.4 crore was taxable under Section 28(ii)(a) of the Act. To this show-cause notice, the assessee responded on December 28, 2019. Hearing was granted to the assessee and after perusal of the records and on consideration of the judgments relied upon by the assessee, assessment was completed under Section 143(3) of the Act on December 29, 2019 holding the total assessed income to be Rs.77,61,50,670/-. Subsequent to the same, computation was completed and computation order was also issued on the same date seeking a demand of Rs.35,95,82,634/-. Notice under Section 156 was also issued for the above sum and the petitioner was directed to deposit the said sum of money within 30 days from the date of the notice. In the meantime an order for provisional attachment was issued under Section 281B of the Act on December 26, 2019 attaching the bank account of the petitioner.
(3.) Mr. Ratnanko Banerji, Senior Advocate has relied upon several judgments being Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Kay Arr Enterprises reported in (2008) 299 ITR 348 (Madras); Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Jalandhar vs. Ashwani Chopra reported in (2013) 352 ITR 620 (P&H); Commissioner of Income Tax vs. AL. Ramanathan reported in (2000) 245 ITR 494 (Madras) and Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai vs. Sachin P. Ambulkar reported in (2014) 221 Taxman 67 (Bombay) (MAG.) to buttress his argument that amounts received on account of a family arrangement/re-arrangement are capital receipts and are not taxable in any manner whatsoever. He further submits that neither is capital gains payable on the sum nor can the sum be taxable under Section 28(ii)(a) of the Act. Mr. Banerji further relies upon Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Balmiki Prasad Singh reported in (2018) 259 Taxman 372 (SC) to support his argument that an assessment order can be challenged in writ proceedings in spite of the fact that there may be an alternative and efficacious remedy.;