Professional Update
(Income Tax Case laws)
Civil Appeal 10070 of 2024 (Delhi High Court).
Raghav Garg
vs
Income Tax Officer Ward 35(1) Delhi.
Ratio.
The Delhi High Court held that in writ jurisdiction, it is neither necessary nor apposite for the court to proceed on an adjudicatory exercise on the allegation being made on the notice u/s 148. Therefore, the notice u/s 148 is sustained.
Facts.
The appellant has filed writ petition against an order dated 12.04.2024 passed under section 148A of the income tax act pertaining to the assessment year 2020-21. It is alleged that the 2 firms from which the appellant has purchased amounting to Rs.1,09,50,285/- is non existence. The Investigation wing alleged that purchases from these firms are bogus in nature. The appellant submitted the invoice and bank payment details, but the Ld. AO proceeded to issue notice u/s 148 since the creditworthiness of the firm is not proved.
Issue.
Whether the notice u/s 148 is valid in law.
Held.
The Delhi High Court held that it is neither necessary nor apposite for this Court to proceed on an adjudicatory exercise regarding the allegations made in the notice as that is the matter which is to be considered by the AO in the reassessment proceedings. Suffice to say that the AO had sufficient grounds that suggest that assessee’s income for the AY 2020-2021 has escaped assessment.
Therefore, the Impugned Notice u/s 148 is sustained.
(Disclaimer: The information provided by the author in the article is for general informational purposes only. All information provided is in the good faith, however we make no representation or warranty of any kind, express or implied, regarding the accuracy, adequacy, validity, reliability, availability or completeness of any information in the article.)
CA Manoj Garg
9811275735