2026 (4) TMI 745

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd learned Senior Standing Counsel Mr. Aaditya Bhatt for the respondent. Learned advocate Mr. Anjaria has tendered the copy of the judgement dated 10.02.2026 passed in Special Civil Application No. 13093 of 2025. Learned advocate Mr. Soparkar, has submitted that the issue is squarely covered in the said decision. 2. Having regard to the controversy arising in the petition which is in narrow compass, with the consent of the learned advocates for the respective parties, the matter is taken up for hearing. 3. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned Senior Standing Counsel Mr. Aaditya Bhatt waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent. 4. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....property. Subsequently, vide order dated 05.05.2016, the District Collector, Ahmedabad set aside the order dated 24.09.2015 passed by the Deputy Collector, Sanand and restored the mutation entries. 5.2. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner filed suit being Special Civil Suit No. 406 of 2016 for setting aside the sale deed which took place between Shahnoor Kothawala and Pradeep Joiser and also sought for declaration of title and possession of the said land before the District Court, (Rural) Ahmedabad. Along with the same, revision application and stay application was also filed before the Special Secretary, Revenue Department (Appeals) [SSRD] by the said Shahnoor Kothawala and Pradeep Joiser challenging the order dated 05.05.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the insight portal as per the risk management strategy formulated by the Board, the impugned notice under Section 148(1) of the Act came to be issued by the respondent asking the petitioner to show cause as to why notice under Section 148 of the Act should not be issued alleging income escapement assessment at Rs. 1,17,00,000/-. In response to the same, the petitioner filed a detailed reply objecting against the impugned notice for reassessment. The respondent rejected the submissions advanced by the petitioner and passed the impugned order dated 25.06.2025 under Section 148A(3) of the Act and also issued notice under Section 148 alleging escapement of income assessment at Rs. 1,17,00,000/-. Hence, the petitioner is constrained to approach ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cannot be relied upon as the facts recorded therein have not been further investigated by any of the authorities. So far as the image of the cash receipt which has been found from the mobile phone, it is submitted that the same also does not in any manner reflect that the petitioner has obtained the amount in cash for the land in question. 6.2. Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Soparkar has submitted that the author of the said complaint which has been filed before the Director General of Police, Gandhinagar i.e. Ramesh Suthar is never summoned by the authorities and hence in wake of the fact it is submitted that reopening is required to be quashed and set aside. 7. In response to the aforesaid submissions, learned Senior Standing Counsel M....