AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (5) TMI 106
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Rs. 1,45,78,825/-. Mr. Naniwadekar, on instructions, states Petitioner was unaware about the status of returns because Petitioner has not even received any intimation under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"). 5. Petitioner thereafter received a notice dated 23rd March 2023 issued under Section 148A (b) of the Act. The annexure to the notice stated thus: "As per information available on Insight portal of Income Tax Department, it is noticed that you have undertaken huge transaction during F.Y. 2018-19 relevant to A.Y. 2019-20 but have not filed Income Tax Return (ITR) which suggests that income chargeable to tax for the year under consideration has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Act. The details of the information on which reliance is being place are as under........" A table containing details of payments made to contractors was also provided. Petitioner filed an undated reply but served on 17th April 2023 in which, after giving background of the business carried out by Petitioner, Petitioner also informed Respondent No. 1 that he had filed ROI for AY 2019-20 and gave details thereof. The details of transactions given....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... receipts from M/s Prathmesh Constructions) has escaped assessment for Α.Υ. 2019-20" Petitioner was also served with the impugned notice dated 21st April 2023 under Section 148 of the Act. 7. It is at this stage, Petitioner has filed the present Petition impugning the order dated 21st April 2023 passed under Section 148A (d) of the Act and the notice also of the same date issued under Section 148 of the Act on various grounds. 8. An affidavit in reply has been filed through one Ajay Raghunath Pawar, who is Respondent No. 1, affirmed on 20th September 2023. In the affidavit in reply, Petitioner's averment that in the impugned order dated 21st April 2023, Respondent has accepted that on verification, the information reported by Insight portal is accounted for, has not been denied. The stand taken in effect is that the AO is a mere post office, who finds materials and then forwards it to the Faceless Assessing Officer ("FAO") and the FAO will go into the details to decide whether there is any escapement of income. We do not agree with the stand taken in the affidavit in reply. 9. Admittedly, in the notice issued under Section 148A (b) of the Act, certain alle....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the contract work done by Petitioner or whether any accommodation entry was provided to Prathamesh Constructions. It is necessary to note that, first of all, in re-assessment proceedings, the law is clear. An Assessing Officer cannot indulge in a fishing enquiry. In Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Private Limited 2007 (291) ITR 500 (SC), the Apex Court has held that at the stage of issuance of notice, the only question is whether there was relevant material on which a reasonable person could have formed the requisite belief of escapement of income. In the notice issued under Section 148A (b) of the Act, there is not even a reference of what is stated in paragraph 6.1 of the impugned order. As held by this Court in Neetu M. Chandaliya v. Income Tax Officer-14(2)(3) 2023 SCC Online Bom 2046, the reasons as mentioned in paragraph 6.1 of the impugned order, at the highest, can only be termed as "a suspicion subject to a case of fishing enquiry". 10. Moreover, in the impugned notice dated 23rd March 2023 under Section 148A (b) of the Act, there is reference to Prathamesh Constructions to whom an amount of Rs. 39,80,357/- has been paid. I....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lief that income had escaped assessment. Those judicial decisions had held that when the assessment was sought to be reopened on the ground that income had escaped assessment on a certain issue, the Assessing Officer could not make an assessment or reassessment on another issue which came to his notice during the proceedings. This interpretation will no longer hold the field after the insertion of Explanation 3 by the Finance (No. 2) Act of 2009. However, Explanation 3 does not and cannot override the necessity of fulfilling the conditions set out in the substantive part of section 147. An Explanation to a statutory provision is intended to explain its contents and cannot be construed to override it or render the substance and core nugatory. Section 147 has this effect that the Assessing Officer has to assess or reassess the income ("such income") which escaped assessment and which was the basis of the formation of belief and if he does so, he can also assess or reassess any other income which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice during the course of the proceedings. However, if after issuing a notice under section 148, he accepted the contention of the assessee and....