Case Law Details
K. Abdul Majeed Vs ITO (Kerala High Court)
In a recent judgment dated 21st December 2023, the Kerala High Court addressed the case of K. Abdul Majeed vs. Income Tax Officer (ITO) concerning orders passed under Section 148(A)(d) of the Income Tax Act for the assessment years 2016-2017 and 2019-2020. The appellant challenged the orders, contending that they were issued without providing him with a hearing.
The High Court, in its judgment, upheld the appellant’s argument, finding that the orders were indeed passed without giving the appellant an opportunity to be heard. Consequently, the Court quashed the orders and remanded the matter back to the Income Tax Authority with a directive to afford the appellant a chance for a hearing before passing fresh orders under Section 148(A)(d).
However, during the proceedings of the appeal, the Court noted that the deposits in question, made in three bank accounts belonging to third parties, were treated as unexplained investments of individuals named Rejilal, Sajilal, and Pankajam under Section 69 of the Income Tax Act. Given this development, the Court questioned the continuation of proceedings against the appellant under Section 148.
After careful consideration, the High Court concluded that since the deposits had been attributed to individuals other than the appellant and were treated as unexplained investments under Section 69, there was no basis to continue the proceedings against the appellant under Section 148. Therefore, the Court allowed the writ appeal, setting aside the judgment of the Single Judge and quashing the impugned orders (Exts.P6 and P7) unconditionally. Additionally, the consequential orders (Exts.P8 and P9) and annexures produced in the writ petition and writ appeal were also quashed.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
