Writ petition dismissed; taxpayer must address alleged escaped income for AY 2017-18 with Assessing Officer. The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging the order u/s 148A(d) and the consequential notice u/s 148 of the IT Act, 1961, regarding alleged escaped ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Writ petition dismissed; taxpayer must address alleged escaped income for AY 2017-18 with Assessing Officer.
The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging the order u/s 148A(d) and the consequential notice u/s 148 of the IT Act, 1961, regarding alleged escaped income for AY 2017-18. The petitioner failed to counter allegations of transactions with a shell entity, M/s Metal Impex. The court found no grounds for interference under Article 226, allowing the petitioner to address rights and contentions before the Assessing Officer.
Issues involved: Impugning order u/s 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and consequential notice u/s 148 of the Act based on alleged escaped income for Assessment Year 2017-18.
Impugned Order and Allegations: The writ petitioner challenged the order u/s 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 30 March 2024 and the consequential notice u/s 148 of the Act. The proceedings stemmed from a notice dated 21 March 2024 u/s 148A(b) alleging that income chargeable to tax for the Assessment Year 2017-18 had escaped assessment. The notice required the petitioner to show cause as to why a notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 should not be issued.
Background and Allegations: The case of the assessee was flagged as a potential risk case as per the Risk Management Strategy formulated by the CBDT. The petitioner filed a return declaring income of Rs. 69.255 lakhs, which was processed under section 14(1)(a). It was revealed that the petitioner had taken accommodation entries from M/s Metal Impex, which was deemed a shell entity conducting high-value transactions for accommodation entries. An amount of Rs. 1,61,19,174/- was alleged to have escaped assessment for the AY 2017-18.
Contentions and Dismissal: The petitioner failed to refute the transactions with M/s Metal Impex or provide necessary documents in response to the notice. Consequently, the court held that the petitioner did not make a case warranting interference under Article 226 of the Constitution. The writ petition was dismissed, but the petitioner's rights and contentions could still be addressed before the Assessing Officer.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
