TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 21X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... asis of the demand is erroneous and the impugned order proceeds to give new reasons, which the petitioner has not been given an opportunity to defend, the impugned order is set aside. The notice issued u/s 148A(b) shall be treated as an additional show cause notice and the petitioner shall submit his explanation to this additional show cause notice within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Decided in favour of assessee. - Honourable Ms.Justice P.T.Asha For the Petitioner : Mr.A.G.Sathyanarayana For the Respondent : Mr.N.Dilip Kumar Senior Standing Counsel ORDER The petitioner has invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court seeking the issue of a Writ of Certiorarifie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Act dated 04.03.2023 proposing to issue a notice under Section 148 of the Act to assess/reassess the income under Section 147 of the Act. The petitioner has once again submitted a detailed reply dated 13.03.2023 reiterating the earlier reply and substantiating the reason as to why he had not filed his return of income for the assessment year 2016-2017. However, without considering the same, the respondent had chosen to issue the impugned order under Section 148A of the Act dated 25.03.2023 thereby compelling the petitioner to move this Court. 4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, who would submit that the orders have been passed without affording an opportunity to the petitioner to submit his response. It is hi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... impugned order of the respondent. 6. Heard the learned counsels appearing on either side. 7. The very basis, on which the clarification letter has been issued by the respondent, appears to be flawed for the following reasons:- Admittedly, the petitioner has purchased the property for a sum of Rs. 90,00,000/-. It is not the case of the respondent that the petitioner has purchased two properties for a sum of Rs. 90,00,000/- each. On the contrary, even according to the clarification letter dated 10.02.2023 and the impugned order, the respondent has calculated Rs. 90,00,000/- as a sale consideration and a sum of Rs. 90,00,000/- which has been reflected in the TDS statement shown as payment of consideration for the purchase of immovable pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
