Delhi HC set aside Section 148A(d) order passed without considering reply of Assessee – directs de novo exercise

Ashok Kumar Garg Vs ACIT (Delhi High Court)

According to the petitioner, although the amount of alleged bogus purchase bills has been quantified as Rs.24,10,705/- the amount in issue is only Rs.13,73,503/-. It is, thus, the petitioner’s case that Rs.10,37,202/- has been wrongly included.

Mr Puneet Rai, learned senior standing counsel, who appears on behalf of the respondents/revenue, on the other hand, cannot but accept that since the reply was on record, the impugned order wrongly notes that the petitioner had not filed the reply.

Therefore, in our view, on this short ground alone, the impugned order deserves to be set aside.

It is ordered accordingly.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.