9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (7) TMI 283 - HC - Income TaxValidity of reopening of assessment - misalignment in the allegation made in the notice issued u/s 148A(b) and the case related information details (CRID) - HELD THAT - The core of the petitioner s defense that the CRID which is appended to the notice issued u/s 148A(b) does not align with what is indicated in the body of the notice. This, on the face of it, appears to be correct. It appears that the CRID which has been furnished to the petitioner, along with the notice dated 23.05.2022, does not concern the petitioner. CRID in fact refers to one Mr Rahul Dureja, although we are told that the PAN referred to therein concerns the petitioner. Thus the best way forward would be to set aside the order issued u/s 148A(d).
Issues involved:
The judgment concerns a writ petition related to Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18, challenging various notices and orders issued under the Income Tax Act, 1961. Details of the Judgment: Assailed Notices and Orders: The petitioner challenged a notice u/s 148A(b) of the Act, an order passed u/s 148A(d) of the Act, and a consequential notice issued under Section 148 of the Act. Misalignment Issue: The main issue highlighted in the case was the misalignment between the allegation in the notice issued u/s 148A(b) and the Case Related Information Details (CRID). Petitioner's Defenses: The petitioner's defenses included discrepancies in the name and value of information in the notices, lack of provided reports/statements, and dealing with unlisted company shares which the petitioner denied. Court's Observation: The court observed that the CRID furnished to the petitioner did not align with the information in the notice, as it referred to a different individual, Mr. Rahul Dureja, instead of the petitioner. Court's Decision: The court decided to set aside the order issued u/s 148A(d) of the Act and consequently invalidated the notice issued u/s 148A(b) and other show cause notices. The Assessing Officer (AO) was directed to conduct a fresh assessment, providing material information to the petitioner, allowing a response, a personal hearing, and issuing a speaking order. Conclusion: The writ petition was disposed of with the above directions, and parties were instructed to act based on the digitally signed copy of the order.
|
