Seema Gupta Vs ITO (Delhi High Court)
Present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 30th June, 2022 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) and the consequential notice dated 30th June, 2022 issued under Section 148 of the Act for the Assessment Year 2013-14.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the reassessment proceeding in the case of the petitioner is clearly a case of ‘change of opinion’. In support of his submission, he draws this Court’s attention to the original assessment proceedings, which culminated in an order under Sections 143(3) and 154 of the Act.
A perusal of the paper book reveals that the issue which is sought to be reopened in the proceeding under Section 148 of the Act had been discussed, deliberated and verified by the Assessing Officer at the time of original assessment proceedings. It seems that the Assessing Officer had applied its mind and then passed the assessment order in favour of the petitioner.
However, while passing the impugned order under Section 148A(d) of the Act, the Assessing Officer has wrongly concluded that the assessee had not disclosed the sale of the property and long term capital gain in the ITR filed or was accepted by the Assessing Officer.
Keeping in view the aforesaid, the impugned order and notice dated 30th June, 2022 issued under Section 148A(d)/148 of the Act are set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration in accordance with law within four weeks.
Accordingly, the present writ petition along with pending application stands disposed of.
