RAJIV SHAKDHER, GIRISH KATHPALIA
Srivenkateshwar Tradex Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Rajiv Shakdher, J. (Oral)
1. Issue notice.
1.1. Mr Ruchir Bhatia, learned senior standing counsel, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents/revenue.
2. Given the directions that we propose to pass, Mr Bhatia says that no counter-affidavit is required to be filed in the matter and he will rely on the record presently available with the court.
2.1. Therefore, with the consent of the counsels for the parties, the writ petition is taken up for final hearing and disposal at this stage itself.
3. This writ petition concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2019-20.
4. The record shows that the petitioner was issued a notice dated 05.03.2023 under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, "1961 Act"], with regard to the bogus purchases allegedly made by it from two suppliers i.e., Jatalia Global Ventures Ltd. [in short, "JGVL"] and RCI Industries & Technologies Ltd. [in short, "RCI"].
4.1. The value of the bogus purchases qua each of these suppliers was placed at Rs.21,00,24,258/-. The cumulative value of the transactions with these two entities was, thus, pegged at Rs.49,40,45,269/-.
4.2. It appears that as per the said notice, the petitioner was required to file its resp
Adherence to statutory provisions, including providing adequate time for filing responses, and granting the assessee an opportunity to be heard before passing an order.
The importance of the petitioner's response to the notice issued under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act and the granting of a personal hearing.
Point of Law – Needless to state that if and when such steps are taken and if petitioner has a grievance, he shall be at liberty to take his remedies in accordance with law.
The court emphasized the importance of considering the petitioner's reply and according a personal hearing before passing an assessment order under the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Failure to consider the petitioner's reply can lead to the setting aside of an impugned order and grant liberty for a de novo exercise by the Assessing Officer.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the Assessing Officer to consider the material available on record, including the reply filed by the assessee, before deciding ....
The court emphasized the importance of addressing the petitioner's submissions and complying with the time limit for filing the reply, leading to the order for a de novo exercise by the AO.
The court emphasized the importance of the Assessing Officer's proper consideration of the petitioner's objections and material placed before forming an opinion on alleged income chargeable to tax.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the amended re-assessment scheme introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, and the importance of upholding principles of natura....
The court held that the Assessing Officer's failure to consider the petitioner's detailed replies before passing the reassessment order violated procedural justice under the Income Tax Act.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.