9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 989X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amount deposited under the Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Yojana Scheme, 2016, on 31.03.2017 has not been taken into consideration under the impugned assessment order. Contention of the petitioner that since he has has availed the benefit of Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Yojana Scheme, 2016, the cash amount cannot be treated as an unexplained money under Section 69 (A) has not been considered by the respondent in accordance with law. Similarly, the contention of the petitioner that amendment made to Section 115BBE in the year 2020, will not apply to the assessment year 2017-2018, has also not been considered by the respondent in the impugned assessment order. The respondent has also not considered the petitioner's contention in this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x Act, 1961. 2 . Heard Mr.K.Soundararajan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.N.Dilip Kumar, learned Standing counsel for the respondent. 3 . The petitioner has challenged the impugned assessment order on the following grounds:- (a). The respondent has violated the principles of natural justice by not affording sufficient opportunity to the petitioner while passing the impugned re-assessment order. (b). No personal hearing was granted to the petitioner as stipulated under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. (c). The respondent has failed to take note of the fact that on receipt of the notice dated 02.03.2017 from the respondent, the petitioner has opted to take the benefit of the Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalya ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e counter affidavit filed by the respondent, they have stated as follows:- (a). The petitioner has admitted the cash deposit of a sum of ₹ 82,29,000/- made during the specified period (i.e., 09.11.2016 to 31.12.2016) under the Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Yojana Scheme 2016, dated 31.12.2016 and paid taxes thereof. (b) . However, as per the details available with the Department, the total cash deposit made by the petitioner during the period from 01.04.2016 to 31.03.2017, is for a sum of ₹ 1,20,34,000/-, for which, no explanation has been offered by the petitioner. (c) . The details of claims of declaration made under the Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Yojana Scheme, 2016, on 31.03.2017 in Form-I, depositing tax, surcha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 119 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 6. The learned Standing counsel for the respondent in his arguments has reiterated the contents of the counter affidavit filed by the respondent before this Court. 7 . Admittedly, as seen from the impugned assessment order passed under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the petitioner has not participated in the said proceedings and the order is in the nature of ex parte assessment order. The grounds raised by the petitioner, namely, the cash amount of a sum of ₹ 82,29,000/- deposited under the Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Yojana Scheme, 2016, on 31.03.2017 has not been taken into consideration under the impugned assessment order. It is the contention of the petitioner that since he has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fording sufficient opportunity to the petitioner to raise all his contentions available to him under law. 10. For the foregoing reasons, the impugned assessment order dated 23.12.2019 is hereby quashed and the matter is remanded back to the respondent for fresh consideration and the respondent shall pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law after giving sufficient opportunity to the petitioner to raise all his contentions and also affording him the right of personal hearing within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 11. With the aforesaid direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. - - TaxTMI - TMITax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
