9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (10) TMI 187X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Darshana Doshi and returned to Mr. Hardik Parekh. In such circumstances, there is no escapement of income of the late father of the petitioner is concerned. The reason given by the Assessing Officer for alleged escapement is therefore not sustainable since there is no unexplained amount in the bank statement on record since the assessee did not retain the amount and as such the ingredients of Section 68 are not attracted. We are of the opinion that the AO could not have come to the conclusion that it is a fit case for reopen the assessment. The petition therefore succeeds and is accordingly allowed. - HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA AND HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MAUNA M. BHATT Appearance: For the Petitioner(s) No. 1: Mr SN Divatia ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... notice on 17.06.2022 raising the objection that notice under Section 148 as well as notice under Section 148A (b) was issued against the name of her late father and therefore such notices issued against dead persons are without jurisdiction. Reliance was placed on the decision of this Court in the case of Rasid Lala V/s Income Tax Officer vide order dated 29.11.2016 passed in Special Civil Application No. 18987 of 2016 and cognate matters. The petitioner also without prejudice to the preliminary objections contended that the loan amount which was the subject matter of proposed scrutiny was paid out of the balance in the bank account of the deceased by NEFT. In support of such contentions copy of the bank statement was also annexed with the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitioner has failed to show the source of Rs. 3,25,00,000/- which was advanced to Ms. Darshana Doshi in the year under consideration which is alleged to have been returned back in the subsequent year in the month of September, 2015 and accordingly there is an escapement of income to the extent of Rs. 3,25,00,000/- for the year under consideration. It was further submitted that the original notice was issued in the name of late Mahasukhlal Navnidhlal Parekh which has subsequently been rectified by issuing the impugned order under Section 148A (d) in the name of the petitioner. It is also submitted that the impugned notice under section 148 of the Act dated 30.07.2022 was also issued in the name of the petitioner and therefore the present p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
