9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 458X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... regular assessment proceedings there is no query on credit card expenses or alleged cash receipt. Therefore, both issues do not appear to have been examined. The assessment order further records that the assessment was limited scrutiny assessment only for verification of deduction under Chapter VI. The Petitioner has not enclosed the submissions made during assessment proceedings in the present petition, and therefore, we cannot give any conclusive findings in the writ proceedings. Therefore, on these counts, the submissions made prima facie are required to be rejected. Non addressing of objections raised by the petitioner - Second submission that in the annexure to notice u/s 148A(b), it is stated that the return is not filed is incorrect since the return was, in fact filed and the same has not been disputed in the order rejecting the objections. In our view, the reopening has to be done based on information and the said information has been reproduced in the annexure to the notice under Section 148A(b). It is based on the said information that the present proceedings are initiated. Although the respondents in the said annexure to the notice have stated that the return has not be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ised on 13 April 2017, but the capital gain disclosed remained intact. 3. The aforesaid return of income was selected for a scrutiny assessment by the respondents vide notice under Section 142 (1) dated 26 October 2018 of the said Act. In the annexure to the said notice, the petitioner was called upon to furnish the copy of bank statement, copy of form No. 26-AS, re-conciliation of the receipts with return of income, documentary evidence for claim of deduction under Chapter VI-A, etc. 4. On 30 November 2018, an assessment order under Section 143 (3) was passed by the respondents, who accepted the return of income. The assessment order records that the scrutiny was limited to only verifying deductions under Chapter VI-A. 5. On 24 March 2023, a notice under Section 148-A(b) of the Act for the assessment year 2016-17 came to be issued by the respondents. In the annexure to the said notice, it was stated that the respondents had received the information in accordance with the Risk Management Strategy Formulated by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) and as per the said information, it was alleged that the petitioner had received cash of Rs.1.30 crore which is undisclosed and furth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... search in the case of a party to whom the land was sold took place on 6 June 2018 which was prior to 1 April 2021 and therefore provisions of Section 148 as amended would not be applicable. We may note that after the matter was closed for orders, in the afternoon session, Ms. Pawar mentioned and stated that she forgot to argue one more point, which is the ground relating to the issue being covered by the decision of this Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Ors. (2024) 464 ITR 430. 9. Ms. Pawar, further submitted that the issues were examined during the course of the assessment proceedings since the bank statement was furnished in the course of the regular assessment proceedings. In view thereof, Ms. Pawar submitted that the impugned proceedings are without jurisdiction and ought to be quashed. She relied upon the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of Shri. Trilochanlal Goyal Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax ors. Writ Petition No.13342 of 2018 and the decision of the co-ordinate bench of this Court in the case of Narendra Kumar Shah Vs.Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax ors. (2024) 465 ITR 385 in support of her submissions. 10. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... out for interference. 14. The first submission of Ms. Pawar that these issues were examined and, therefore, the proceedings are without jurisdiction is required to be rejected. The issue of alleged cash receipt was not examined during the course of the regular assessment proceedings since the information from Faridabad Officer was received after the conclusion of the assessment proceedings. The assessment proceedings were concluded on 30 November 2018 whereas the information of alleged cash receipt was received on 21 February 2022. Furthermore, from the questionnaire issued to examine issues in the regular assessment proceedings there is no query on credit card expenses or alleged cash receipt. Therefore, both issues do not appear to have been examined. The assessment order further records that the assessment was limited scrutiny assessment only for verification of deduction under Chapter VI. The Petitioner has not enclosed the submissions made during assessment proceedings in the present petition, and therefore, we cannot give any conclusive findings in the writ proceedings. Therefore, on these counts, the submissions made by Ms Pawar prima facie are required to be rejected. 15. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt in the case of Hexaware Technologies Ltd. (supra). We have perused the grounds raised in the petition and do not find any grounds having been raised on this issue except in para dealing with delay in explaining in approaching this Court. No foundational facts are stated in this regard in the petition. Therefore, this ground also cannot be considered. However, the petitioner is at liberty to raise this ground before the appellate authority if and when any occasion arises. 19. Now we come to the submission of Ms. Pawar concerning approval under Section 151 of the said Act. Ms. Pawar submitted that the approval is without application of mind. We have perused the approval memo, which was annexed to the petition and we do not find prima facie that the approval is without application of mind. In the remarks column in Item 21 and 22 it is stated after going through the annexure, the authority has given its approval by referring to the material available on record and consideration of the same. This is not a case where in the approval column, the approving authority has only stated yes , but the approval records the perusal of the draft order submitted by the assessing officer, material ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
