Tosca Master Vs DCIT (Delhi High Court)
Delhi High Court held that passing of order by the revenue under section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act on the basis of fresh ground which was never taken up with the assessee in the notice is untenable in law.
Facts- Respondent vide notice dated 22.03.2023 u/s. 148A(b) of the Act, sought to initiate assessment u/s. 147 read with Section 148 of the Act, pursuant to the information flagged by the Risk Management Strategy, alleging that in the absence of return of income, the source of income of the investment remained unexplained.
Petitioner contested that during the impugned AY, no income had accrued or was received in India. Further, petitioner pointed out various fallacies in the notice issued u/s. 148A(b). However, respondent passed the impugned order u/s. 148-A (d) dated 26.04.2023.
Conclusion- There is yet another reason as to why the impugned notices cannot be sustained, inasmuch as, the basis of order dated 26.04.2023 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act is the alleged discrepancy noticed between the share prices as provided by the petitioner from the exchange rate (NSE). Undoubtedly, this aspect of the matter was never taken up with the petitioner in the notice issued under Section 148A(b) of the Act. The noticee or the assessee should not be prejudiced or be taken by surprise. The uncontroverted fact is that in the notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act, there is no mention of any discrepancy in the share price.
