TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (10) TMI 1238
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 27th March 2025, for the Assessment Year 2023-24. By the impugned Assessment Order, Respondent No. 1 has assessed the total income of the Petitioner at Rs. 27.91 Crores in place of Rs. 3.09 Crores returned by the Petitioner. This apart, the Notice of Demand issued under Section 156 of the Act is also impugned. 3. At the outset, the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the Petitioner, fairly stated that the Petitioner has already filed an Appeal challenging the Assessment Order to save limitation. He, however, submitted that this is a fit case where the Writ Court ought to interfere, as there has been a complete breach of the principles of natural justice. Further, he submitted that if ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of peak balance in respect of loans from directors are concerned, it was submitted that firstly, the Petitioner was never asked to show cause as to why the peak balance should not be added. Further, no basis/working has been provided as to how the peak balance was arrived at. Most importantly, while calculating the peak balance, the opening balance of loans are also considered and for the same, reliance has been placed on three decisions. However, these decisions are not in existence at all. On the contrary, various High Courts including this Court, has taken a view that the opening balance cannot be added under Section 68 of the Act. 6. Per contra, Mr. Sharma, the learned Counsel for the Respondent, submitted that since, the Petitioner ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r, he submitted that even the rectification order, though not brought on record, does not resolve the grievances raised. 8. Having perused the papers and the submissions of the parties, we find that the Assessment Order is, indeed, passed in breach of the principles of natural justice. On the first addition, it is apparent that the addition was made without considering the reply to the Notice under Section 133(6) of the Act. On page 568, the Petitioner has annexed the copy of the Notice dated 4th March 2025 issued to the supplier of the Petitioner under Section 133(6), wherein he was asked to furnish various details by 5th March 2025. The said supplier had duly filed his reply on 8th March 2025 which is available at page 571 of the Petit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....istakes like the present one creep in. It is also one of the grievances of the Petitioner that they are clueless as to how the figures are arrived at as no basis or working was ever shown to the Petitioner, nor was any Show Cause Notice issued before making the addition of peak balance. Even this grievance of the Petitioner is justified. 10. Thus, in the peculiar facts of the present case, the Petitioner should not be relegated to avail the alternate remedy. We find that this a fit case to interfere under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 11. In view of the foregoing discussion, we hereby quash and set aside the Assessment Order passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Act dated 27th March 2025, for A.Y.-2023-....