AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (8) TMI 1407
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....notice under Section 148 of the Act should not be issued. It is stated in the notice that as per the information the income chargeable to tax for the assessment year 2016-17 has escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 147 of the Act. The notice dated 28.02.2023 further states that as per the information available with the assessing officer, the petitioner has entered into the following transaction: Sr. No. Information Description Information Value 1. Purchased immovable property valued at Rs. 30,00,000/- 1,59,00,000/- 2. TDS Statement-Payment of consideration for purchase of immovable property 25,00,000/- 3. TDS Statement-Interest other than interest on securities 45,194/- 3. It is noticed that the petitioner has not filed return of income for assessment year 2016-17. 4. After receiving the said notice, as per the petitioner, he immediately raised concern that though in the notice dated 28.02.2023, it is mentioned that information has been enclosed with the notice, but no such detail/information has been attached along with the said notice and thereafter, the petitioner submitted a detailed reply to the notice along with....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ard. 11. It is also contended that the reassessment proceedings cannot be said to be time barred because the unexplained transaction represents income assessment amounting to Rs. 1,84,45,194/-, which exceeds the prescribed monetary limit to Rs. 50,00,000/-. It is also contended that the order dated 05.04.2023 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act is not based on surmises and conjectures but on the basis of the information and material available with the assessing officer. It is submitted that the assessee has failed to furnish satisfactory explanation in response to the notice issued under Section 148A(d) of the Act and in such circumstances, the assessing officer, on the basis of information and material available with it, has passed the order dated 05.04.2023 in accordance with law. 12. It is further submitted that the reassessment notice under Section 148 of Income Tax Act is perfectly legal and cannot be said to be issued in non-compliance of the notification dated 29.03.2023 because the notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act was issued on 28.02.2023 i.e. prior to the issuance of notification dated 29.03.2023. 13. In support of the above contentions, learn....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to Rs. 1,59,00,000/- and Rs. 25,00,000/-. The assessing officer has also not accepted the plea of the assessee that the escaped assessment was Rs. 30,50,000/- only as the value of purchased property was Rs. 79,50,000/-, in which the share of the petitioner is Rs. 30,50,000/- only while observing that the petitioner has not furnished the bank statement. The contention of the assessee that the total escaped income is less than Rs. 50 lac is not accepted by the assessing officer on the ground that the total escaped assessment of the income is Rs. 1,84,45,194/- and the assessee has not filed income tax return for the assessment year 2016-17. It is also recorded by the assessing officer that before issuing notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act, prior approval of Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Rajasthan Jaipur was obtained. 18. We have gone through the reply of the assessee filed in response to the notice dated 28.02.2023 issued under Section 148A(b) of the Act. Along with the reply, the assessee has annexed copy of the registry of the property purchased in joint ownership of him, Anurag Lohiya and Swati Lohiya, bank statement of him ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....take all the points before the assessing authority." (Emphasis supplied) 22. In Anurag Gupta Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward & Ors. (supra), the Bombay High Court has set aside the order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act as well as the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act on the ground that no material was supplied to the petitioner. However, in the present case, the assessee was given due opportunity of hearing while giving notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act and the reply filed by him is duly considered and thereafter detailed order under Section 148A(d) of the Act has been passed. 23. In Krishna Diagnostic Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 14 (supra), the Delhi High Court has set aside the order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act on the ground that the assessing officer has ignored the relevant documents filed by the assessee along with his reply in response to the notice issued under Section 148A(b) of the Act. However, in the present case, the assessing officer has duly considered all documents filed by the petitioner along with his reply. 24. In Balesh Jain Sons HUF Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. (supra), the Delhi High Cou....