Abhishek Bansal Vs ITO (Delhi High Court)
Delhi High Court held that clause (b) of Section 148A of the Income Tax Act does not stipulate that the Assessee is required to be provided minimum of seven working days. Accordingly, petition held to be unmerited and hence disposed of.
Facts- The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning a notice dated 21.03.2024 passed u/s. 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as well as an order dated 30.03.2024 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act. Additionally, the petitioner also impugns a notice dated 30.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Act. The petitioner’s challenges the notices and the order on the premise that the petitioner was not granted seven days to file a response to the notice issued u/s. 148A(b) of the Act.
Conclusion- Held that in the present case, the petitioner was required to clearly show the movement of goods to establish that the goods had in fact moved from Shri Ajay Gupta to the petitioner. However, it does not appear that any such information was provided by the petitioner to the AO.
The contention that the petitioner was not afforded sufficient time to file a reply to the notice issued under Section 148A(b) of the Act is unpersuasive. The said ground clearly appears to be an after thought as the petitioner had not made any request for further time to file a response to the said notice. On the contrary, the petitioner had filed his response to the said notice within the stipulated period.
