TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 580
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed 28.02.2023 passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act pertaining to Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and based on the information flagged in Insight portal in the category of NMS that assessee had made cash deposit of INR 56,70,000/- and sold immovable property for INR 56,60,000/- therefore, proceedings u/s 148A(b) of the Act were initiated by issue of notice dated 16.03.2022 and thereafter, the order u/s 148A(d) of the Act was passed on 29.03.2022 followed by the notice u/s 148 of the Act dt. 30.03.2022. Since the assessee failed to file any details during the course of assessment proceedings, therefore, the assessment was completed ex-parte u/s 144 of the Act wherein an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eciton1 47 of the Act as the notice under Section 148A(b) and subsequent order under section 148A(d), culminating in a Section 148 reassessment notice, are invalid because they are solely based on the assertion that the taxpayer was a "non-filer" despite the same was duly filed." 6. In the said petition, the ld. AR submits that the additional ground of appeal taken by the assessee, is purely legal in nature and requires no verification, therefore, the same deserves to be admitted. He placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 229 ITR 383(SC) and in the case of Jute Corporation of India vs CIT reported in 187 ITR 688. 7. On the other hand, ld. Sr. DR for t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....therefore, the vary basis of recording the satisfaction is incorrect. For this, he placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Narendra Kumar Shah vs. ACIT in the Writ petition No. 2558 of 2023 order dated 10.10.2023. Ld. AR further placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Tarlochan Lal Goyal vs. ACIT in WPC No. 13342/2018 vide order dated 17.08.2023. It is thus, submitted by ld. AR that the reassessment proceedings based on incorrect appreciation of facts, deserves to be hold bad in law and the consequent reassessment order passed deserves to be quashed. 11. Per contra, the Ld. Sr DR for the Revenue vehemently supported the orders of the lower authorities and submits that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion 148A(d) of the Act is unsustainable. This is because the notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act does not call upon Petitioner to provide any justification on any transaction in question. The entire basis for issuing the notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act was that Petitioner was a non-filer for Assessment Year 2019-2020 as he has failed to file the Return of Income and therefore, the income from salary and purchase of securities have not been declared/offered for taxation. But the fact is Petitioner has filed his Return of Income and has also paid total tax of Rs. 18,36,575/and had also claimed refund of Rs. 1,27,100/-. Therefore, the order under Section 148A(d) of the Act, passed on 26th April 2023, has to be quashed and set aside....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....raphs 3 and 4 read as under : 3. Further, it in re-emphasized that (i) Before initiating proceedings under Section 148/147 of the Act, any information available database/portal of the Income Tax on Department shall be verified before drawing any adverse inference against the taxpayers. It is not out of place to mention here that the information made available/data uploaded by the reporting entities may not be fully accurate due to inter alia, error of human nature technical nature, etc. Therefore, due verification may be carried out and opportunity of being heard be given to the taxpayer before initiating proceedings under Section 148/147 of the Act. (ii) The supervisory authorities are hereby advised to keep an e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the facts. Belief stemmed from wholly unfounded reasons thus betrays the pre- requisites of s. 147 of the Act. We find that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the judgements rendered in the case of Arvind Sahdeo Gupta vs ITO-1 and Kunwar Ayub Ali vs ITO (supra) by the Co-ordinate Bench wherein several judgements of the Hon'ble High Courts of different jurisdictions have been referred and it was held that where the reasons cited that the assessee did not file the return of income was found to be factually incorrect, the notice issued under s. 148 of the Act for re-opening of assessment requires to be quashed for assumption of jurisdiction on extraneous grounds. 8. In the light of the judgements rendered i....