9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 775X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xistence of the said entity at the Jasola address and calling for an explanation in that regard, the respondent/Revenue passed the impugned order u/s 148A (d) of the Act dated 31.08.2024. This procedure, to our mind, is abject violation and infraction of the principles of natural justice, inasmuch as, the conclusion regarding the said entity being a non-existent bogus entity was never put to the petitioner in the show cause notice dated 09.08.2024 issued u/s 148A (b) of the Act. In other words, the petitioner was never afforded an opportunity to respond to the said allegation. The aforesaid infraction gathers great significance having regard to the fact that the original assessment proceedings for the AY 2018-19 stood closed. It was only ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 19; c) grant ad-interim stay of the reassessment proceedings undertaken by Respondent No. 1 under section 148 read with section 148A pursuant to the notice dated 31.08.2024 issued under section 148 of the Act for the assessment year 2018-19 pending final disposal of the present writ petition; and d) Such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case." 2. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 3. The impugned show cause notice dated 09.08.2024 (hereafter referred to as "impugned notice") was issued under section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter referred to as "Act") to the petitioner on the basis of High Risk CRIU/VRU information available on 'In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the petitioner for AY 2018-19 suggesting escapement of income of the aforesaid sum. Predicated on the said premise, the respondent/Revenue issued the impugned notice dated 31.08.2024 under Section 148 of the Act. 7. We have heard Mr. Vohra, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shlok Chandra, learned senior Standing Counsel for the respondent/Revenue. 8. It is not disputed that the assessment proceedings for AY 2018-19 had concluded and the present proceedings initiated under Section 148A (b) of the Act was in respect of re-opening of the assessment proceedings. The show cause notice issued under Section 148A (b) of the Act was premised on accommodation entries in the form of bogus capital expenses from fictitious entity, n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he AY 2018-19 stood closed. It was only by the impugned notice under Section 148A (b) of the Act dated 09.08.2024, the initiation of re-assessment proceedings were to commence. Ordinarily, after the closure of the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) would be functus officio and to re-confer jurisdiction upon the AO to initiate re-assessment proceedings, relevant incriminating material ought to be put to the assessee before any such re-commencement can be sought. The view expressed by the learned Division Bench of the High Court of Calcutta in Grindlays Bank Plc. v. Commissioner of Income-Tax reported in 1990 SCC OnLine Cal 396, in this context would be relevant. The relevant paragraphs read thus: "7. I am of the view that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
