2024 (4) TMI 197

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Respondent : Mr.N.Dilip Kumar Senior Standing Counsel ORDER As against the order passed by the respondent u/s. 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 31.03.2023 re-opening the assessment and the consequent notice issued u/s. 142(1) of the Act, dated 04.08.2023, this writ petition is filed by the petitioner. 2. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that before re-ope....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....petitioner, has re-opened the assessment. The respondent has issued notice to an address at Karaikudi, where the petitioner used to reside long back. The petitioner is having valid grounds and therefore, the learned Counsel insisted for providing an opportunity to the petitioner by considering her representation dated 26.07.2023 before passing order u/s. 148A(d) of the Act. 4. Learned Senior St....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s issued calling upon the petitioner for enquiry on 04.08.2023. At this stage, the petitioner has filed this writ petition and obtained an interim order of stay. Therefore, the Department could not proceed further. 6. By relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Anshul Jain v. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax [(2022) 289 Taxman 239 (SC)], learned Counsel submitted that i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ready been passed and therefore, her reply dated 26.07.2023 could not be considered by the respondent. 9. It is the case of the petitioner that she purchased an immovable property at Chennai for a sale consideration of Rs. 1,57,00,000/- vide Doc.No.4060 of 2015 on the file of the Sub Registrar, Neelangarai, Chennai, on 28.05.2015. Of the total sale consideration, a sum of Rs. 1,20,00,000/- was ....