Kalpita Arun Lanjekar Vs ITO (Bombay High Court)
In a recent case before the Bombay High Court, the legality of an income tax reassessment against a housewife, Kalpita Arun Lanjekar, came under scrutiny. The crux of the matter lies in a notice received by Kalpita Arun Lanjekar from the Income Tax Officer, Ward-28(2)(1), under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The notice alleged that income chargeable to tax for the Assessment Year 20162017 had escaped assessment due to high-value transactions, particularly the purchase of immovable property valued at Rs. 30,00,000 or more.
Despite explanations and documentary evidence provided by Kalpita, including the fact that the property was purchased solely by her husband, the reassessment order was still issued. The order cited a lack of details regarding the source of funds for the property purchase.
However, the court’s analysis revealed flaws in the order. It was noted that the Assessing Officer failed to recognize that Kalpita had not contributed financially to the property purchase. Moreover, the Principal Chief Commissioner’s sanction for the order was deemed questionable.
In conclusion, the Bombay High Court ruled in favor of Kalpita Arun Lanjekar, quashing the reassessment order. The judgment underscores the importance of thorough scrutiny in tax proceedings, especially concerning joint property ownership and individual tax liabilities. This case sets a precedent for fair treatment of individuals, particularly housewives, in income tax matters.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF BOMBAY HIGH COURT
1. Petitioner, a housewife who had no income and therefore, was not filing any income tax return, received a notice dated 19th February 2023 from Respondent No. 1, the Income Tax Officer, Ward-28(2)(1) under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”). In the notice it is stated that the officer has information which suggests that income chargeable to tax for Assessment Year 2016-2017 has escaped assessment. The details of information were also made available and it reads as under :
“As per information received from “INSIGHT PORTAL” under Risk Management Strategy (RMS), you have done high value transaction during the year under consideration, however, on verification of the various portals viz. ITBA, Insight, e-filing & CPC-2 portal, it is seen that no ITR has been filed by you for the A.Y.-2016-2017. Therefore, the case has been classified as “Non-filer cases under RMS Cycle for A.Y.-2016-2017”. Since, you have not filed return of income for A.Y.-2016-2017 even though you have made huge transaction during F.Y.-2015-2016 for which information is already available on portal, hence, enquiry is not required in your case.
2. The details of information description, source and nature of information, value/amount of transaction related to show-cause notice u/s 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act is attached separately, and the same are as under :
