MHJ Metaltechs Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (Delhi High Court)
The writ petition was filed before the Delhi High Court challenging the initiation of reassessment proceedings by the Assessing Officer through a notice dated 20.03.2024 issued under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, along with a subsequent letter/notice dated 17.04.2025. The petitioner questioned the validity of these proceedings on the ground that the information supplied in support of the notice was inadequate and vague.
The petitioner argued that the notice merely made passing references to alleged bogus purchases of ₹46,00,460 and fictitious sales of ₹89,86,36,597 without furnishing specific details of the transactions. It was contended that no concrete information was provided to enable the petitioner to respond meaningfully. Further, it was submitted that in the subsequent communication dated 17.04.2025, the Assessing Officer changed the name of the supplier involved in the alleged purchase transaction, which according to the petitioner reflected arbitrariness. The petitioner also contended that the Assessing Officer ignored the binding directions issued in an earlier writ petition disposed of by the Court on 21.03.2025, pursuant to which an earlier order under Section 148A(d) had been quashed based on the department’s concession.
It was further argued that under the scheme of Section 148 of the Act, the assessee is entitled to be supplied with relevant information forming the basis of the belief that income had escaped assessment. Without such information, the petitioner contended, the proceedings amounted to a fishing and roving inquiry, which is impermissible in law.
