Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Deepak Kumar Yadav Vs PCIT (Allahabad High Court)
Appeal Number : Writ Tax No. 561 of 2023
Date of Judgement/Order : 05/05/2023
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Deepak Kumar Yadav Vs PCIT (Allahabad High Court)

Allahabad High Court held that the scope of decision u/s. 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act is limited to the existence or otherwise of information which suggests that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. The same would otherwise remain subject to reassessment order passed u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act.

Facts- Petitioner is an individual who is engaged in the business of trading of Arecanut (Supari), Chopped Betal Nut and Sweet Betal Nut in the name of his proprietary concern namely “S.K.L. Enterprises”.

It transpires that the jurisdictional authority i.e. respondent no. 2 issued a notice to petitioner dated 16.03.2023, u/s. 148A(b) of the Act, 1961 accompanying the information with the assessing officer to suggest that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. Petitioner was accordingly given an opportunity u/s. 148A(b) of the Act to show cause as to why a notice u/s. 148 of the Act be not issued to him on the basis of information which suggests that income chargeable to tax of aggregate Rs. 6,89,93,750/- has escaped assessment for the Assessment Year 2019-20.

The jurisdictional authority has proceeded to pass an order on 29.3.2023 u/s. 148(d) of the Act rejecting the petitioner’s objection to the notice on the ground that information exists to suggest that transactions referred to in the notice are fictitious and without actual supply of goods. Consequently, petitioner’s purchases are treated as fictitious. This amount has been treated as having escaped assessment for the year 2019-20 for the purposes of initiating proceeding u/s. 148 of the Act. Petitioner’s request for cross-examination of suppliers and furnishing of material has been declined considering the time-barring nature of the matter. A consequential notice has also been issued to petitioner on 29.03.2023, u/s. 148 of the Act. Aggrieved by the order u/s. 148A(d) of the Act, dated 29.03.2023 as well as notice of the same date i.e. 29.3.2023 issued u/s. 148 of the Act, the petitioner has approached this Court.

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

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031