2023 (3) TMI 414 - HC - Income Tax

Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - order passed u/s 148A(d) - non disposal of response filed by the petitioner - HELD THAT - This is not a satisfactory disposition of the response filed by the petitioner; in particular, having regard to the fact that the petitioner claims that relevant evidence in the form of challans was placed, both at the time of initial scrutiny assessment and thereafter. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 30.07.2022 passed u/s 148A(d) and the consequent notice of even date i.e., 30.07.2022 issued u/s 148 are set aside. AO will carry out a de novo exercise. AO will also accord a personal hearing to the authorized representative of the petitioner. For this purpose, the AO will issue a notice, which will set forth the date and time of the hearing.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to notice under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for AY 2017-18, challenge to order under Section 148A(d) and consequent notice under Section 148, failure to disclose information on statutory liabilities, applicability of Section 43B of the Act, unsatisfactory disposition of petitioner's response by Assessing Officer.

Analysis:
The High Court heard a writ petition concerning the Assessment Year 2017-18 where the petitioner challenged a notice issued under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, along with an order under Section 148A(d) and a consequent notice under Section 148 of the Act. The core issue was the petitioner's alleged failure to fully disclose information regarding statutory liabilities. The respondent/revenue claimed that income had escaped assessment due to a difference in statutory liabilities between two financial years. The petitioner contended that the statutory liabilities had been paid and not claimed as deductions, thus Section 43B of the Act was not applicable.

The court noted that the petitioner had provided information regarding the statutory liabilities in response to a previous notice under Section 142(1) of the Act. The petitioner had stated that the liabilities had been paid and not claimed as deductions. However, the Assessing Officer did not adequately address this defense in the order dated 30.07.2022 under Section 148A(d). The court found the AO's conclusion unsatisfactory, especially considering the evidence provided by the petitioner in the form of challans during scrutiny assessment.

Consequently, the court set aside the impugned order and notice issued under Section 148A(d) and 148 of the Act. The court directed the AO to conduct a fresh assessment and provide a personal hearing to the petitioner's representative. The court emphasized that the observations made would not impact the merits of the matter, and parties were instructed to act based on the digitally signed copy of the order. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly, and pending applications were deemed disposed of as well.