Section 148A order/notice riddled with mistakes – HC directs AO to issue amended notice

Vidisha Singhal Vs ITO (Delhi High Court)

AO admits that the impugned order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act is riddled with mistakes. He further admits that in the notice issued under Section 148A(b) of the Act, the details of the transactions allegedly carried out by the petitioner were not correct. He states that the transactions were clarified by the ITO (Inv), Unit-7, Delhi in its e-mail dated 14^th July, 2022, which he had incorporated in the order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act.

Keeping in view the aforesaid statements, the impugned order passed under Section 148A(d) and the impugned notice issued under Section 148 of the Act are set aside and the Assessing Officer is directed to issue an amended notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act along with the incriminating material in its possession to the assessee within two weeks. The assessee is given liberty to file a reply to the amended notice within four weeks.

FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF DELHI HIGH COURT

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

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