The court determined that the reopening of assessment under Section 148A was unwarranted as the case fell under Section 153C due to insufficient adherence to procedural requirements.

JUDGMENT

Manmohan, J. (Oral)

1. Present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 9th April, 2022 passed by the Respondent under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short `Act') for the Assessment Year 2018-19 and all consequential proceedings in pursuance thereto including issuance of the notice dated 9th April, 2022 under Section 148 of the Act.

2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that in the present case notice under Section 148A is not warranted as it is a case of Section 153C of the Act to which proviso (c) of Section 148A applies. 

3. Mr. Sunil Agarwal, learned counsel for the Respondent has brought on record the instructions received by him by way of email dated 13th May, 2022. The said email is reproduced as under:

"To,

Sh. Sunil Aggarwal Senior Standing Counsel, High Court 4th Floor, 15 Link Road, Jangpura Extension,

New Delhi

Sir,

Sub: Writ Petition (C) 7115 of 2022 in the matter of Pradeep Kumar Varshney (PAN AAMPV9765D) for A.Y. 2018-19-reg.

Kindly refer to your email dated 12.05.2022 wherein it has been directed to verify and apprise the correct position in the above case regarding re-opening the case u/s 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961. In this regard, correct position in this case is as under:

1. In this case, the information was received, in accordance with the Risk Management Strategy formulated by CBDT, on insight portal of Income Tax Department, under the category High Risk CRU/VRU information system.

2. As per information received in this case, it was noted that a search was conducted in the case of Sangini Group of Surat on 03.12.2021. After verification of the seized material found during search proceedings, it was noticed that some persons have made cash payments with Sangini Corporation and M/s Nandkishore Corporation. The assessee's name i.e Sh. Pradeep Kumar Varshney is also in the list of persons who have made on money to M/s Nand Kishore Corporation. The assessee had paid on money of Rs. 75,34,000/-in cash for purchasing a shop in Sangini Textile Hub-A from Nandkishore Corporation during the A.Y. 2018-19 (F.Y. 2017-18).

3. As per explanation 1 to Section 148 which states as under:

Explanation 1-For the purposes of this section and section 148A, the information with the Assessing Officer which suggests that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment means:

(i) Any information flagged in the case of the assessee for the relevant assessment year with the risk management strategy formulated by the Board from time to time.

(ii) Any final objection raised by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India to the effect that the assessment in the case of the assessee for the relevant assessment year has not been made in accordance with the provisions of this Act.

Hence, considering the information received under the category clause (i) of Explanation of the section 148, the proceedings in this case were initiated u/s 148A and show cause notice under clause (b) of section 148A of the I.T. Act, 1961 was issued with the prior approval of the specified authority on 24.03.2022. The assessee submitted reply to the show cause notice on 07.04.2022, which was considered u/s 148A(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 and thereafter, notice u/s 148 was issued on 09.04.2022 along with passing a order u/s 148A(d) of the I.T. Act, 1961.

Sir, the above is the correct and factual position in this case.

Yours faithfully,

(Subhash Chand)

Income Tax officer

Ward-71(3), New Delhi"

4. In response to a pointed query, Mr. Sunil Agarwal, learned counsel for the Revenue admits that the case of the petitioner falls under Section 153C of the Act.

5. Consequently, this Co