9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (11) TMI 1222X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 807 OF 2023 (T-IT) - - X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the High Court of Bombay in Prakash Krishnavtar Bhardwaj vs. Income Tax Officer, reported in [2023] 451 ITR 27 [Bombay], all further proceedings must fail. 3. Sri Ravishankar S V, also submits that during the financial year relevant to the assessment year 2015-16, the petitioner was employed with M/s Varshitha Enterprises, Kunigal; that the proprietor of this enterprise was not keeping good hea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bile recharge; that the cash deposits even during this subsequent assessment year is treated as business income; the petitioner's income is determined at the rate of 3% of the gross turn over; that the petitioner would not be liable for any income tax for the relevant assessment year and even otherwise if cash deposits are treated as gross business turn over, the petitioner's liability will be bel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... such notice is invalid, no jurisdiction would vest with the first respondent to continue the proceedings pursuant to such notice. 6. However, Sri M.Dilip, submits that the authorities must be reserved with liberty to issue fresh notice if it could be permissible given the provisions of Section 149 of the IT Act. In rejoinder, Sri Ravishankar S V, submits that in the event the writ petition is bei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gs. Hence, the following ORDER The petition is allowed and the impugned notice dated 17.03.2022 issued by the first respondent under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [Annexure-A], the subsequent adjudication order dated 30.03.2022 under Section 148A(d) [AnnexureA1] of the IT Act, the notice dated 31.03.2022 under Section 148 of the IT Act [Annexure-A2], the assessment order date ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
