TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 483X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was unable to obtain relief as was given to him in AY 2011-2012 and AY 2012-2013. Given these circumstances, we have no hesitation in setting aside the impugned order dated 26.07.2022 passed under Section 148A(d) and notice of even datei.e., 26.07.2022 passed under Section 148 of the Act. Liberty is, however, given to the respondents/revenue to take the next steps in the matter, albeit as per law. - W.P.(C) 14173/2022&CM Nos.43309-10/2022 - - - Dated:- 2-12-2022 - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER AND HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU Petitioner: Mr Ruchesh Sinha and Ms Nivedita Jha, Advs. Respondents: Mr Kunal Sharma, Sr. Standing Counsel and Ms Zehra Khan, Jr. Standing Counsel along with Mr Shray Nargot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... DDIT (Investigation) Unit-4(2), New Delhi are present in Court. 5. A perusal of the impugned order dated 26.07.2022 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act does reveal, that the notice issued under Section 148A(b) dated 24.05.2022 was served on the petitioner, and the impugned order referred to above was passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act, based on the report of the Investigation Wing. 6. Paragraph 7.2 of the impugned order discloses this aspect of the matter. For the sake of convenience, the said paragraph is extracted hereafter: 7.2 In the reply furnished, the assessee has denied to have entered into transaction with Sh. Prem Rattan, Prop. Shree Shyam Industries during the year under consideration. He has also stated that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessing officer that the income chargeable to tax for relevant assessment year, which has escaped assessment is more than Rs. 50 Lacs and is represented in the form of asset i.e an income of Rs. 13993239/- (unexplained credit in the account) has accordingly escaped assessment. On the basis of the material available on record, it is concluded that this is found to be a fit case for issuing of notice u/s 148 of the IT Act for the A.Y 2013-14. 7. Mr Kunal Sharma, who appears on behalf of the respondents/revenue, says that proceedings were taken out because of the information available with the Investigation Wing; although, what is not disputed, is that the impugned order under Section 148A(d) of the Act was passed based on the report, wi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
