9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 775X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... "a) writ in the nature of mandamus/ certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing the notice dated 09.08.2024 issued under section 148A (b) of the Act for assessment year 2018-19;. b) writ in the nature of mandamus/ certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing the order dated 31.08.2024 passed by Respondent No. 1 under section 148A(d) and the consequent initiation of reassessment proceedings vide notice dated 31.08.2024 issued under section 148 of the Act for assessment year 2018-19; 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 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ola, Delhi-110025. On that basis, the respondent/Revenue concluded that M/s. Zhonghua (India) Eng. Pvt. Ltd. was a paper entity used for the purpose of accommodation entries by entities like M/s. OPPO Mobiles India Pvt. Ltd and the petitioner. 6. The respondent/Revenue had passed the impugned order under Section 148A (d) of the Act on 31.08.2024, concluding that a transaction amounting to Rs. 7,35,47,572/- shown as expenses being bogus purchases made during FY 2017-18 should be disallowed and would be liable to be added to the total income 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 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the show cause notice dated 09.08.2024 issued under Section 148A (b) of the Act. In other words, the petitioner was never afforded an opportunity to respond to the said allegation. It is trite that principles of natural justice inhere in all administrative and quasi judicial actions, particularly in taxing statutes, unless expressely barred by legislative intent. {See Sahara India (Firm) vs. CIT; (2008) 14 SCC 151} 9. 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 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 clos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... id down by the statute and after fulfilling the conditions laid down in the statute " It is thus clear that the facts obtaining in the present petition get covered under the ratio laid down by the Calcutta High Court, though the same was rendered in the previous tax regime. Ergo, in the absence of such material being put to the petitioner, it was deprived of a valuable opportunity to explain the existence or otherwise of the entity i.e. M/s. Zhonghua (India) Eng. Pvt. Ltd. Thus, on the aforesaid analysis, we find that the said infraction has deprived the petitioner of an opportunity to offer proper explanation. 10. In view of the above, we have no hesitation in setting aside the impugned order under Section 148A (d) of the Act dated 31.08 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
