Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Vs and B Containers LLC vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle International Tax 3(1)(1) & Anr.

Vs and B Containers LLC vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle International Tax 3(1)(1) & Anr.

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided May 14, 2026
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1265933

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Delhi High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
W.P.(C)/5642/2025
Subject
Right to Information

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Right to Information

Key legal issue
Right to Information

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Vs and B Containers LLC

Advocate Mr. Sachit Jolly, Mr. Abhyudaya Shankar Bajpai, Mr. Puneet Rai

Respondent

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle International Tax 3(1)(1) & Anr.

Excerpt

.....submitted that the impugned assessmentorder is liable to be set aside on basic issue of non observance of principlesof natural justice and the same being violative of article 14 of the constitution of india inasmuch as neither the notice under section 148 of the act of 1961 was served upon the petitioner nor any reply, etc. could be filed by it.3. the petitioner has approached this court with specific averments and pleadings to this effect.4. though no reply to the writ petition has been filed but mr. puneetrai, learned senior standing counsel for the respondents on instructions informed that the department is not in a position to produce the evidence/proof of service of the notice issued under section 148 of the act of 1961.5. we have therefore, every reason to infer that no notice under section 148 of the act of 1961 was served upon the petitioner and resultantly, the impugned assessment order is against the principles of natural justice.6. the impugned assessment order so also the corresponding penaltyorder dated 29.03.2023 are hereby quashed and set aside on the sole count ofnon observance of natural justice.7. the notice passed under section 148 of the act of 1961 is revived.8. the ao shall serve a copy of the notice under section 148 of the actof 1961 alongwith the reasons to the petitioner on its email id [email protected], while fixing a date of appearance/hearing at least after 15 days of such service.9. the petitioner shall appear before the ao on the date fixed and file reply, if so desired. the proceedings shall thereafter be taken up in accordance with the law, obviously after observing the principles of natural justice.10. the petition stands allowed, the pending application is disposed of.11. the petitioner shall be free to take all objections, including theobjection of limitation, if it proposes to contend that the proceedings were barred by limitation, as on 30.03.2021 or even as per notice under section 148 of the act of 1961 dated 30.03.2021......

Full Judgment

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 5642/2025 & CM APPL. 25698/2025 VS AND B CONTAINERS LLC .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Sachit Jolly, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Abhyudaya Shankar Bajpai, Adv.

versus

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAX 3(1)(1) & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Puneet Rai, SSC.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

ORDER

% 14.05.2026

1. By way of the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the assessment order dated 26.05.2022 for Assessment Year 2013-14 and consequential penalty order dated 29.03.2023 passed under Section 271(1)

(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act of 1961’) by the Assessing Officer (AO) .

2. Mr. Sachit Jolly, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, while reserving his arguments on merit, submitted that the impugned assessment

order is liable to be set aside on basic issue of non observance of principles

of natural justice and the same being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India inasmuch as neither the notice under Section 148 of the Act of 1961 was served upon the petitioner nor any reply, etc. could be filed by it.

3. The petitioner has approached this Court with specific averments and pleadings to this effect.

4. Though no reply to the writ petition has been filed but Mr. Puneet

Rai, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents on instructions informed that the Department is not in a position to produce the evidence/proof of service of the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act of 1961.

5. We have therefore, every reason to infer that no notice under Section 148 of the Act of 1961 was served upon the petitioner and resultantly, the impugned assessment order is against the principles of natural justice.

6. The impugned assessment order so also the corresponding penalty

order dated 29.03.2023 are hereby quashed and set aside on the sole count of

non observance of natural justice.

7. The notice passed under Section 148 of the Act of 1961 is revived.

8. The AO shall serve a copy of the notice under Section 148 of the Act

of 1961 alongwith the reasons to the petitioner on its email ID [email protected], while fixing a date of appearance/hearing at least after 15 days of such service.

9. The petitioner shall appear before the AO on the date fixed and file reply, if so desired. The proceedings shall thereafter be taken up in accordance with the law, obviously after observing the principles of natural justice.

10. The petition stands allowed, the pending application is disposed of.

11. The petitioner shall be free to take all objections, including the

objection of limitation, if it proposes to contend that the proceedings were barred by limitation, as on 30.03.2021 or even as per notice under Section 148 of the Act of 1961 dated 30.03.2021. DINESH MEHTA, J VINOD KUMAR, J MAY 14, 2026/cd

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial