Aditya H. Patel Vs ITO (Gujarat High Court)
In the case of Aditya H. Patel Vs ITO, the Gujarat High Court examined the validity of reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act for Assessment Year 2019-20.
The petitioner, a salaried individual, had filed his return of income on 02.09.2019 declaring total income of Rs.10,12,110/-. Subsequently, based on material allegedly seized during a search conducted on 28.09.2021 in the case of B Safal Real Estate Group and City Estate Management India, the respondent recorded a satisfaction note on 15.03.2025 under Explanation 2(iv) to Section 148 and clause (c) of the proviso to Section 148A. The respondent claimed that the seized material pertained to the petitioner and indicated escapement of income. The satisfaction note was approved by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, and thereafter a notice under Section 148 was issued on 28.03.2025.
The petitioner complied with the notice and filed a return, but repeatedly sought reasons and material relied upon for reopening. Despite these requests, the respondent initially proceeded with notices under Sections 143(2) and 142(1) without furnishing the material. Eventually, on 16.12.2025, the respondent provided the satisfaction note and approval. The petitioner objected to the reopening, contending that the proceedings were based on vague and uncorroborated material seized from a third party and that no valid satisfaction had been formed. Further objections raised by the petitioner remained undisposed of.
