TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (2) TMI 754
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ection 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') as well as the order dated 08.04.2022 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act seeking to reopen the income tax assessment of the petitioner for the assessment year 2018-19 with the following prayers:- "(a) quash and set aside the impugned notice as well as the impugned order at ANNEXURE "A (Colly.)" to this petition; (b) pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, stay the implementation and operation of the impugned notice as well as impugned order at ANNEXURE "A (Colly.)" to this petition and stay further proceedings for Assessment Year 2018-19; (c) any other and further relief deemed just and proper be granted ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n gross violation of principle of natural justice since the draft assessment order under Section 144B was not served. 2.5. This Court issued notice for final disposal on 07.12.2021 and eventually, the matter was withdrawn on dated 09.02.2022 as the appeal had been preferred by the petitioner before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 3. By way of the present petition, the petitioner has challenged the action of the respondent on the ground that the addition made was in respect of the losses incurred by the petitioner on account of the trading in commodities and the assessment order is subject matter of the appeal before the first Appellate Authority which is still pending. 3.1. The very transactions of the purchases have been....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt year 2018-19. On verification of documents available on record, it is noticed that the assessee - company had made this transactions. In view of these information, the show cause was issued as to why the notice under Section 148 be not issued. 6.2. The reply has been given on 28.03.2022. The petitioner did draw the attention of the other side that by merely saying that there are fictitious transactions without mentioning any detail it is not correct to proceed and also it is illegal as per the law. They would also not been in a position to respond to this as all transactions are labelled as fictitious in nature and made a request to drop the proceedings. 6.3. The respondent chose to pass an order under Section 148A(d) of the Act an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....time as may be specified in the notice being not less than seven days, but, not exceeding 30 days from the date on which such notice is issued or such time as may be extended by him on the basis of the application. 7.2. Non-providing of the information which is the edifice for issuance of notice would surely amount to not providing an opportunity to the petitioner. 8. We could notice that at the time of its response to the notice under Section 148A(b), the attention of the authority concerned had been drawn to the fact that those information are missing which would result into the petitioner not being in a position to respond effectively to the allegations of the alleged bogus purchases to the tune of Rs. 69.61 crores (rounded off). ....