TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1650X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ltogether or the absence of any reasons at all. Thus, this Court cannot draw any inference of breach of principles of natural justice or arbitrariness in the impugned order passed by the respondent Authority. Accordingly, the requirement of Section 142(2A) of the said Act cannot be said to have been not complied by the respondent Authority. The same requires no interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed - Writ Petition No.2009 of 2018 (T-RES) - - - Dated:- 12-2-2018 - Dr. VINEET KOTHARI J. ORDER Mr. Anirudha R.J. Nayak, Advocate for Petitioner. The petitioner M/s. Habitat Shelters Private Limited has filed this Writ Petition aggrieved by the dire ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... levant provisions of the Act and therefore could not be subjected to this Special Audit. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that the reasons assigned by the respondent Authority in Annexure-H-1 dated 19.12.2017, which are quoted below cannot be held to be irrelevant for the purpose of directing Special Audit under Section 142(2A) of the Act. The said reasons, prima facie, indicate that the petitioner assessee had adopted different accounting practices for different projects of real estate undertaken by it, viz., Indiranagar Project and Safari Quest Project. The reasons contained in paras-2 to 5 are quoted below for ready reference:- 2. You have stated your objections to the proposed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ained to three ventures, the accounting of the same is complex as also involving multiplicity of agreements and understanding. Hence, your objections are not acceptable. 5. Therefore, the aforesaid portions of the said communication, prima facie , indicates that to understand the complex treatment of multiplicity of agreements entered into by the petitioner for different projects, the Income Tax Authority directed a Special Audit for better clarity of the picture of Books of Accounts maintained by the petitioner during the said period, which are supposed to be consistent and on uniform method, so that a consistent view about the taxability of income arising or accruing to the petitioner assessee for the said year could be taken and in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of principles of natural justice in the present case. Even though the objections to the Proposition Notice for Special Audit were submitted by the assessee on 19.12.2017 and on the same day, the Communication aforesaid, Annexure-H1 dated 19.12.2017 came to be issued, it cannot be said that the objections raise d by the assessee were not considered by the respondent Authority. The petitioner assessee was heard before the said Authority during the course of assessment proceedings and a hearing on 7.12.2017 also took place in this regard before the said Assessing Authority, where the Managing Director of the petitioner Company Mr.Deepak Lulla attended the proceedings, which appears from the aforesaid quoted portion of the Communication Annexur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
