9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 471X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the scheme of the faceless assessment under Section 144B of the Act. It is not in dispute that the AO did not supply copy of reply received pertaining to the pursuant to the notice issued under Section 133 (6) of the Act. After issuance of the show cause notice in the form of draft assessment order, no any opportunity of cross-examination of the parties whose reply is considered to make addition under Section 68 of the Act was granted to the petitioner. This Court, in the case of Dineshkumar Chhaganbhai Nandani [ 2023 (6) TMI 935 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] and in the case of Darshan Enterprise [ 2022 (1) TMI 605 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] and in the case of Prakashchandra Chhotalal Shah ( 2023 (2) TMI 756 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] in similar facts, af ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h and set aside the assessment order dated 18th March 2024 passed by the respondent. [5] The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner has filed return of income for Assessment Year 2022-23. Notices were issued under Section 142 (1) and 143 (2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act ). The petitioner, in response to the said notices, filed reply and thereafter, the respondent Assessing Officer issued the show cause notice dated 6th March 2024 proposing to add the entire balance of unsecured loan obtained by the petitioner of Rs. 11,27,14,020/- as unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Act. The petitioner filed reply on the same date i.e. on 6th March 2024. The petitioner filed another reply also on the same date. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en referred to in the show cause notice which is in form of the draft assessment order for making addition of unsecured loan obtained by the petitioner under Section 68 of the Act. [7] Learned advocate Mr. Gandhi invited the attention of this Court that the Assessing Officer has made addition of Rs. 6,42,98,316/- on the ground that though the assessee provided confirmation in respect of the few parties, but failed to submit any documentary evidence to prove the genuineness of the transaction and even the third party did not respond to the notice issued under Section 133 (6) of the Act, the Assessing Officer, therefore, made addition in respect of six parties who have not responded to the summons under Section 133 (6) of the Act amounting to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nn.com 100 (Gujarat) and the decision in the case of Dineshkunar Chhaganbhai Nandani vs. Income Tax Officer reported in [2023] 153 taxmann.com 187 (Gujarat), to submit that the respondents authorities have committed a breach of principles of natural justice and therefore, this petition may be entertained and the impugned assessment order may be quashed and set aside with a direction to the respondents to pass a fresh de novo order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. [10] On the other hand, learned Senior Standing Counsel Mr. Varun Patel could not controvert that there was no reference to the summons issued under Section 133 (6) of the Act in the show cause notice. [11] In view of the above facts emerging from the recor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
