TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (1) TMI 71
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....- "1. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not upholding the validity of the notice issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) without the proper and mandatory compliance with the provisions of section 148A(b). 2. The learned CIT(A) has further erred in law and on facts by failing to consider that the then AO has given notice u/s 148A(b) to assessee on 31.03.2022 and as per provision of 149 the period of limitation available to the AO for passing an order under clause (d) of section 148A is less than seven days, such remaining period shall be extended to seven days and the period of limitation under this sub-section shall be deemed to be extended accordingly. 3. The learned CIT (....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e purchases, the AO had issued notice u/s 133(6) of the Act to different parties. Upon verification, it is noticed by the AO that seven different parties did not respond to the notice issued u/s 133(6) of the Act. Hence, the AO called for the details of bank statements and other evidences in support of the alleged purchases from those seven parties. As the assessee did not submit evidence in the support of the purchase, the AO considered the total purchase of Rs. 5,42,96,886/- from those seven parties as bogus purchase and disallowed the same u/s 37(1) of the Act. The AO completed the assessment u/s 147 r.w.s 144B of the Act on 25.03.2024 by assessing the total income at Rs. 5,41,69,809/-. 4. Aggrieved with the above order, assessee pref....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....har Shetty * 165 taxmann.com 192 (Bom) Everest Kanto Cylinder Ltd. * 164 taxmann.com 414 (Bom) Venus Jeweł * 164 taxmann.com 633 (Bom) Sushila Sureshbabu Malge * 165 taxmann.com 424 (Bom) Navita S. Hetampuria (ii) That the notice u/s 148A(b) was issued by the AO on 31.3,2022 fixing the case for 7.4.2022, but the AO couldn't even wait for the date of hearing and was in such a hurry that he passed order u/s 148A(d) on 05.04.2022 only. Thus no proper opportunity of hearing was given by the AO to the assessee to file reply and the order passed u/s 148A(d) and notice u/s 148 and all the subsequent proceedings are void and non-est. (iii) That in notice u/s 148A(b), AO had alleged that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al from Ld. PCIT, Rohtak which is in gross violation on Sec. 151 of the Act, which renders the whole re-assessment proceedings null and void. In this regard, he relied on the following case laws :- * Ghansnyam K. Khabrani 346 ITR 443 (Born) * SPL's Siddhartha Ltd. 345 ITR 223 (Delhi) * Sunint Investment & Technologies P. Ltd. 54 SOT 126 (Del) 5. Ld. CIT (A) perused the written submissions and observed that the assessee has raised some of the valid objections in the written submissions dated 07.01.2025 by filing notice issued u/s 148A(b) of the Act. From the said notice, ld. CIT (A) observed that the information that suggested with the AO was pertaining to bogus purchase of Rs. 18,28,800/- during the FY 2014....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ally different. He observed that recording some reason pertaining to AY 2015-16 in the notice issued u/s 148A(b) of the Act for the AY 2018-19, passing statutory order u/s 148A(d) of the Act two days before the time limit given for compliance to the assessee in the statutory notice in violation of natural justice, recording irrelevant facts other than the reason communicated in the order passed u/s 148A(d) of the Act and issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act without obtaining proper sanction from the appropriate authority defeats the whole purpose of re-assessment. He observed that the JAO and FAO have committed irreparable mistakes in this assessment order and such mindless reassessment order passed by the Faceless Assessment Unit and casual a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the approval should have been taken from Pr. CCIT or Pr. DGIT or CCIT or DGIT. Further we observed that the reason recorded in the notice issued u/s 148A(b) of the Act and order passed u/s 148A(d) of the Act were totally different. Further we observed that the statutory order u/s 148A(d) of the Act was passed two days before the time limit given for compliance to the assessee in the statutory notice in violation of natural justice. Further we observed that issuing notice u/s 148 of the IT Act without obtaining proper sanction from the appropriate authority defeats the whole purpose of re-assessment and the JAO and FAO have committed irreparable mistakes in this assessment order. 12. Further we observed that on careful perusal of the reas....