2023 (3) TMI 482

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t three days before the next date of hearing. W.P.(C) 930/2023 and CM APPL. 3647/2023 [Application filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking interim relief] 2. This writ petition assails the order dated 23.07.2022 passed under Section 148A(d) and the consequential notice of even date i.e., 23.07.2022 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, "the Act"]. 2.1 In addition thereto, a challenge is also laid to the notice dated 25.05.2022 issued under Section 148A(b) of the Act. 3. To be noted, the impugned order and the notices concern Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16. 4. Broadly, what emerges upon perusal of the record is that the petitioner sold shares and earned therefrom long term capital gains. In the preced....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ner claims that she gave a detailed reply, with regard to the sale consideration received on the sale of shares concerning an entity going by the name NCR Business Park Pvt. Ltd. The sale consideration, which had been received albeit, through banking channels, according to the petitioner, was also set forth in the reply; it was indicated that the petitioner had received Rs.14,03,68,959/- against the sale of shares. 4.4. The petitioner, in the very same reply, stated that she had earned a long term capital gain amounting to Rs.13,86,56,886/-, which was invested in a tenanted residential property located at DLF City, Phase 1, Gurgaon. The investment made, according to the petitioner, was Rs.14,15,00,000/-. In this behalf, reference was mad....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f at all, could have been triggered based on an objection raised by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India [in short, "CAG"]. (ii) Second, the audit objection could not have been taken as "material", based on which reassessment proceedings could have been initiated. (iii) Third, deduction claimed under Section 54F of the Act would not constitute an "asset" under Section 149 of the Act. (iv) Fourth, since the Assessment Year in issue is AY 2015-2016, reassessment proceedings could not have been commenced, unless the petitioner failed to disclose, truly and fully, all material facts. 8. Mr Sunil Agarwal, learned senior standing counsel, who appears on behalf of the respondents/revenue, contests each of the ....