TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (7) TMI 445
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt Director of Income Tax (Investigation) at the Mangalore Airport. An inquiry was carried out as to the nature and source of investment in gold jewellery held by them by issuing summons under Section 131(1A) of the Act upon the petitioner as well as the employees namely Mr. Chidrap Gandhi and Mr. Paresh Rawal. [2.2] On 17th April 2012, notice was also issued by the Income Tax Officer (Investigation), Air Intelligence Unit, Ahmedabad specifically inquiring into the purchase of the gold and its accounting by the petitioner. [2.3] Apropos to the aforesaid, the petitioner submitted details vide letter dated 3rd May 2012. Thereafter, the employees along with gold held by them were released from Mangalore. [2.4] The petitioner filed his return of income for the Assessment Year 2013-14 on 20th September 2013 declaring, inter alia, total income of Rs. 22,12,882/-. The return was selected for scrutiny. During the course of scrutiny, notices under Section 142 (1) of the Act dated 14th August 2015, 11th January 2016 and 5th February 2016 were issued upon the petitioner inquiring, inter alia, the entire business activity of the petitioner including the travelling expenditure. The petitione....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ighing 19,756.720 grams, for which, the petitioner could not offer any explanation with documentary evidence and failed to furnish the source of purchase of gold and thereby, an amount of gold remained unexplained under Section 69 of the Act and thereby, the same is said to have escaped assessment of income. Learned advocate Mr. Soparkar vehemently submitted that such reason is fundamentally erroneous inasmuch as no new information said to have been received by the Assessing Officer for reopening of assessment. Learned advocate Mr. Soparkar further submitted that for the very quantum and amount of gold, thorough inquiry was conducted by the Investigation Unit at Mangalore Airport and after having been satisfied from the details so provided by the petitioner, the matter was closed and the gold was released. According to learned advocate Mr. Soparkar, the very information was already in possession of the then Assessing Officer during the course of original scrutiny assessment proceeding and at the time when the assessment order dated 4th March 2016 under Section 143 (3) of the Act was passed. Thus, reopening and / or reassessment proceeding cannot be allowed to continue in absence of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion 148 of the Act deserves to be quashed and set aside. [6] By making above, learned advocate Mr. Soparkar prays this Court to allow the present petition. [7] Per contra, learned advocate Mr. Varun K. Patel for the Revenue, while supporting the impugned notice and order, has made the following submissions: [7.1] Learned advocate Mr. Patel, at the outset, submitted that the present petition is filed at a premature stage inasmuch as only a notice under Section 148 read with Section 147 of the Act has been issued. He further submitted that in any adversary event, the petitioner would have an alternative efficacious remedy by way of appeal to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) and thereafter, to the learned Tribunal as per the provisions of the Act. Accordingly, learned advocate Mr. Patel has requested this Court to dismiss the present petition on this count alone. [7.2] Learned advocate Mr. Patel submitted that the case was sought to be reopened as per the procedure prescribed and after recording of satisfaction and taking approval of the competent authority and thus, it cannot be said that the case was reopened in a mechanical manner. [7.3] Learned advocate Mr. Patel subm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ies and having gone through the material produced on record, it appears that the two employees of the petitioner namely Shri Chidrap Gandhi and Shri Paresh Rawal were initially intercepted at Mangalore Airport on 16th April 2022 with gold ornaments by the Assistant Director of Income Tax (Investigation) at Mangalore. The summons were issued upon the petitioner as well as his two employees under Section 131(1A). In furtherance thereof, thereby, the petitioner appeared personally and submitted all the details vide letter dated 3rd May 2012. It is pertinent to note that at that time, the employees as well as he gold were released without any further inquiry. The petitioner filed his return of income on 20th September 2013 declaring total income of Rs .22,12,882/-, which, in turn, was taken under scrutiny, wherein the petitioner submitted all the details regarding quantity of gold ornaments, details of closing stock along with relevant documents, details of opening stock purchase, consumption, yield and sale both with respect to raw material as well as with respect to finished goods on 2nd January 2016 and having considered all the material made available by the petitioner, the then As....