9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 366X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed Kumar Jain, Advocate with Mr.Nishchay Kantoor and Ms.Richa Mishra, Advocates. For the Respondents : Mr.Sanjay Kumar, Advocate with Ms.Easha Kadian, Advocate for revenue. JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J (Oral): 1. Present writ petition has been filed challenging the notice dated 7th April, 2021 issued by Respondent No. 1 under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), order dated 29th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lf observed in the impugned order under Section 148A(d) of the Act that the amount alleged to have escaped assessment is below the threshold of Rs.50,00,000/-, yet Respondent No. 1 issued notice under Section 148 of the Act. The relevant extract of the order is reproduced hereinbelow: - "6.10 Similarly as far as transaction amounting to Rs.926187/- with entity M/s Jignesh Shah and concern in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctions in the present case. He, however, does not dispute that the income alleged to have escaped assessment is less than Rs.50,00,000/-. 4. This Court is of the view that the reopening in the present case is in violation of CBDT Instruction No.01/2022 dated 11th May, .2022, wherein it has been clearly stated that notices in the cases pertaining to assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16 ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
