Kalyanasundaram Chandrasekaran Vs ITO (Madras High Court)
Madras High Court set aside the draft assessment order and remanded the matter to AO since the additional document submitted is likely to have material impact on the re-assessment proceedings. Thus, matter remanded to verify the validity and genuineness of the additional document.
Facts- The petitioner received a notice dated 29.03.2021 u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act. Thereafter, a notice u/s. 142(1) was issued to the petitioner stating that he had transferred 5000 shares of M/s. Info-Drive Analytics Pvt. Ltd (Info-Drive India) to M/s. Info-drive Analytics (Mauritius) Pvt. Ltd (Info-drive Mauritius), during the financial year 2015-2016 for a total consideration of Rs.12,50,000/-. He was called upon to provide an explanation with regard to the said transaction. By reply dated 23.08.2021, the petitioner raised objections on the ground that the procedure specified u/s. 127 was not followed, but filed the return of income in response there to. This was followed by further notices u/s. 142(1) on 21.02.2022, 24.02.2022 and 25.02.2022. In response to the notice dated 25.02.2022, the petitioner asserted that he did not transfer any shares to Info-drive Mauritius during the financial year 2015-2016. Therefore, the petitioner requested AO to provide the basis for issuing the notice u/s. 148. By a further notice, dated 24.03.2022, AO enclosed documents with regard to the transfer said to have been effected by the petitioner.
