TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (11) TMI 93
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e petitioner and learned Senior Standing Counsel Mr. Varun K. Patel for the respondents. 2. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned Senior Counsel Mr. Varun Patel waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondents. 3. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the notice dated 30.03.2021 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (For short 'the Act') for Assessment Years 2015-16 and 2016-17. 4. The petitioner filed the return of income for both the years declaring the total income of Rs. 12,82,120/-for A.Y. 2015-16 and Rs. 3,24,740/- for A.Y. 2016-17. The intimation under Section 143 (1) was issued accepting the return of income. Thereafter, the impugned notices w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y entity. 6. Learned advocate Mr. B.S. Soparkar for the petitioner submitted that the respondent Assessing Officer disposed off the objections raised by the petitioner for A.Y. 2015-16 without considering the reply. It was further submitted that the reasons recorded are contrary to the facts on record inasmuch as the petitioner had submitted the ledger account of Orange Tradex Private Limited for Financial Year 2013-14 and 2014-15 which clearly shows that the petitioner had transactions of sales with said firm during the Financial Year 2013-14 but during the previous year 2014-15, relevant to Assessment Year 2015-16 there was no transaction but except repayment of the opening balance in the month of January-2015. It was therefore submitt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g Officer after analyzing all the facts has recorded the reasons for reopening the case which was sent to the competent authority for approval to issue the notice under section 148 of the Act and the competent authority after arriving at a satisfaction with the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer has granted the approval for issuance of notice for reopening. It was therefore submitted that the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner that the respondent-Assessing Officer has issued the notices on borrowed satisfaction is also not correct inasmuch as the information made available to the Assessing Officer is enough to form the reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and the contentions raised by the assessee can ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e, the Assessing Officer could not have assumed the jurisdiction for both the years as for the Assessment Year 2016-17 also the amount of Rs. 49,60,000/- is already part of the ledger account for the Financial Year 2015-16 and admittedly, there is no transaction with the said entity by the petitioner during the relevant previous years to the Assessment Year 2016-17. Thus, considering the facts of the case, it appears that the respondent Assessing Officer has issued the impugned notice for reassessment only on the basis of the information without considering the reply filed by the petitioner and passed the order disposing off the objections for A.Y. 2015-16. It is true that the order disposing the objections for A.Y. 2016-17 is not passed by....