9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 754X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax has escaped the assessment and sub-clause (b) of Section 148 provides for an opportunity of being heard to the assessee by serving upon him a notice to show cause within such time as may be specified in the notice being not less than seven days, but, not exceeding 30 days from the date on which such notice is issued or such time as may be extended by him on the basis of the application. Non-providing of the information which is the edifice for issuance of notice would surely amount to not providing an opportunity to the petitioner. As at the time of its response to the notice under Section 148A(b), the attention of the authority concerned had been drawn to the fact that those information are missing which would result into the pet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as well as the impugned order at ANNEXURE A (Colly.) to this petition; (b) pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, stay the implementation and operation of the impugned notice as well as impugned order at ANNEXURE A (Colly.) to this petition and stay further proceedings for Assessment Year 2018-19; (c) any other and further relief deemed just and proper be granted in the interest of justice; (d) provide for the cost of this petition. 2. The petitioner is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. For the assessment year 2018-19, the petitioner was engaged in the business of trading of shares and securities, dealing in commodities and F O purchased fabrics aggregating to Rs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... als). 3. By way of the present petition, the petitioner has challenged the action of the respondent on the ground that the addition made was in respect of the losses incurred by the petitioner on account of the trading in commodities and the assessment order is subject matter of the appeal before the first Appellate Authority which is still pending. 3.1. The very transactions of the purchases have been involved which had resulted into initiating this process of reopening which is nothing but a repetition and duplication. The petitioner, therefore, has questioned the very issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act. Moreover, another reason, according to the petitioner, is that no information has been supplied to the petitioner. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... other side that by merely saying that there are fictitious transactions without mentioning any detail it is not correct to proceed and also it is illegal as per the law. They would also not been in a position to respond to this as all transactions are labelled as fictitious in nature and made a request to drop the proceedings. 6.3. The respondent chose to pass an order under Section 148A(d) of the Act and the objections of the assessee with regard to his not being aware of the alleged bogus purchases and the complete information not having been furnished, was not held sustainable. 6.4. Relying on the report of STR bearing No. Detail- 10496480 and also on the ground that the investigation team had reported that the assessee was also r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... opportunity to the petitioner. 8. We could notice that at the time of its response to the notice under Section 148A(b), the attention of the authority concerned had been drawn to the fact that those information are missing which would result into the petitioner not being in a position to respond effectively to the allegations of the alleged bogus purchases to the tune of Rs. 69.61 crores (rounded off). 9. This being the case, in our opinion, the petitioner has been able to make out a breach of principle of natural justice resulting into this Court not waiting for the alternative remedy also to come in the way in denying the relief to the petitioner. Resultantly, interference is required at this stage quashing and setting aside the or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
