9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 1630X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rcising power of inspection under Section 134 of the Act or under Section 135 of the Act, however, the same has to be exercised with due caution and care. While the petitioner was served with a notice under Section 133 (6) of the Act in the present case and reply was filed, the reply was ignored stating that the same has not been filed. In circumstances where the information may not have been received in the electronic mechanism system which is also prone to errors, once it has come on record that reply had actually been filed, it would be wholly unjustified to allow the Revenue to make the assessee face the cumbersome proceedings under Section 148 of the Act. Having proceeded on a presumption that reply not having been filed and the amount ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Respondent Nos. 1 and 5 : Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Senior Standing Counsel. For the Respondent : Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal Opal, Senior Standing Counsel nos. 2 and 3 (through video conferencing). SANJAY VASHISTH, J. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner prays for quashing of the notices issued to him under Section 133 (6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act ) and subsequent notice under Section 148 of the Act dated 31.03.2024 for AY 2020-21. 2. The petitioner is engaged in the business of sale of medicines through firm M/s Ecomed Mullana and M/s M. M. Healthcare, Solan and also earning commission from marketing activities and supply of electricity through proprietorship firm Imperial Consultancy Services. 3. A notice under Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the respondents issuing notice under Section 148 of the Act as there was no income escaped or remained un-informed while processing the income tax return for A.Y. 2020-21. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on Supreme Court judgment in ITO vs Lakhmani Mewal Dass 103 ITR 437, to submit that reasons for determination of belief must have a rational connection or relevant bearing. Rational connection postulates that there has been a direct nexus or live link between the material coming to the notice of ITO and the formation of the belief that there had been escapement of income of the assessee. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as the return reflected the inclusion of the amount in its ITR, and reply had al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the petitioner assessee further submits that despite providing exhaustive reply to each and every query, including query No. 6, petitioner assessee has been served with the impugned notice dated 31.03.2024 (P-7), under Section 148 of the Act. Learned Senior counsel, thus, submits that notice under Section 148 of the Act, has been issued erroneously, assuming that the petitioner assessee has received the commission of Rs.14,58,004/-, and failed to include it in the taxable business turnover, nor filed a reply to the query. 12. Attention is drawn to the return filed by the petitioner assessee for the Assessment Year 2020-21, under ITR acknowledgment No. 998247251040121, wherein, the amount in question, Rs. 14,58,004 has been disclosed as the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under Section 133 (6) of the Act and of the petitioner having reflected the alleged escaped income in his income tax return, still the respondents insist of having rightly issued the notice. 15. Almost in similar facts, the High Court of judicature of Bombay in Writ Petition No. 8594 of 2024 Benaifer Vispi Patel vs The Income Tax Officer Ward 1 and another decided on 15.07.2024 found that while the Central Government is empowered under Section 135A of the Act to make a scheme of income tax in the official gazette for the purpose of collecting information under Section 133B of the Act or for demanding the information under Section 133C of the Act, or by exercising power of inspection under Section 134 of the Act or under Section 135 of the A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... jit Singh vs. Union of India and others, decided on 29.07.2024 , wherein it has been held as under: 16. We are in agreement with the view taken by the Coordinate Bench and hold that such circular or instructions by the Board could not have been issued to override statutory provisions or to make them otiose or obsolete. Legislative enactments having financial implications are required to be followed strictly and mandatorily. By exercising the powers contained in Sections 119 and 120 of the Act, 1961 as well as Section 144B (7 8), the authorities cannot be allowed to usurp the legal provisions to their own satisfaction and convenience causing hardship to the assessees. It also leaves confusion in the minds of the taxpayers. In the opinion of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
