9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 885X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... transfers took place during the financial year 2015-16 and eventually 10,000 shares were transferred to Infodrive Mauritius. The said document appears to indicate that 5000 shares were transferred by the petitioner to Mr.V.N.Sesharigi Rao and those shares were eventually acquired by Infodrive Mauritius. Since this transaction was not disclosed by the petitioner in his return of income, it is possible that the capital gains arising therefrom escaped assessment. Thus, there is some basis for re-opening the assessment. Petitioner has placed additional documents on record. These documents appear to indicate that the petitioner transferred the shares to Mr.V.N.Sesharigi Rao on 12.02.2015. If the said documents are found to be valid and genuine ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Ltd(Info-drive Mauritius), during the financial year 2015-2016 for a total consideration of Rs. 12,50,000/-. He was called upon to provide an explanation with regard to the said transaction. By reply dated 23.08.2021, the petitioner raised objections on the ground that the procedure specified under Section 127 was not followed, but filed the return of income in response there to. This was followed by further notices under Section 142(1) on 21.02.2022, 24.02.2022 and 25.02.2022. In response to the notice dated 25.02.2022, the petitioner asserted that he did not transfer any shares to Info-drive Mauritius during the financial year 2015-2016. Therefore, the petitioner requested the Assessing Officer to provide the basis for issuing the notic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aside and the matter remanded for re-consideration from the stage of issuing a speaking order based on the objections of the petitioner. 5. Mr.D.Prabhu Mukunth Arun Kumar, learned junior standing counsel counters these submissions. As regards the applicability of the dictum in GKN Driveshafts (cited supra), he submits that the Court refused to interfere with the notice under Section 148 in that case. By referring to paragraph no.3 of the said judgment, learned counsel points out that the case before the Supreme Court arose out of the dismissal of Writ Petitions by a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court. In that factual context, learned counsel submits that the Supreme Court held that the objections of the assessee should be considered an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere is some basis for re-opening the assessment. 8. However, the petitioner has placed additional documents on record. These documents appear to indicate that the petitioner transferred the shares to Mr.V.N.Sesharigi Rao on 12.02.2015. If the said documents are found to be valid and genuine on verification, they indicate that the share transfer took place during the financial year 2014-15 and not 2015-16. This would have a material impact on the re-assessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer. Consequently, the petitioner should be provided an opportunity to place these documents for consideration by the Assessing Officer before the Assessing Officer prepares the draft assessment order. In order to facilitate this process, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
