JUDGMENT :

[N.V. Anjaria, J.]

1. Heard learned advocate Mr. S.N. Divetia for the petitioner and learned advocate Mr. Nikunt Raval for the respondents at length.

2. Filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, in this Special Civil Application, the challenge is directed against notice dated 31.03.2021 issued by the respondent assessing officer to the petitioner under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, seeking to reopen the assessment in relation to assessment year 2015-16.

2.1 The assessing officer stated that he had reasons to believe that the income in the hands of the petitioner assessee, for the year under consideration, had escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act").

2.2 Also prayed is to set aside the order dated 08.12.2021 whereby the respondent rejected the objections of the petitioner against reopening of the assessment.

3. Stating the attendant facts, the petitioner is an individual who is stated to be deriving income from the property and other sources. He filed his return of income for the assessment year 2015-16 on 31.12.2015 declaring the total income of Rs. 23,71,220/-. The return was processed under section 143(1) of the Act.

3.1 Notice under Section 148 of the Act came to be issued to the petitioner on 31.03.2021 whereby the assessing officer proposed to reassess the income. In response to the said notice, the petitioner filed return of income on 27.05.2021 declaring total income as above. The reasons for reopening the assessment were furnished to the petitioner on 14.07.2021. The petitioner filed his objections on 15.06.2021, which were uploaded on 30.09.2021. On 08.12.2021, the petitioner received notice under section 142(1) of the Act wherein the rejection of the objections came to be incorporated.

3.2 The completed assessment was sought to reopened by the respondent on the ground that the petitioner had entered into a development agreement with land owners of one Gokulesh Infra. In the said transaction, the petitioner was paid Rs.43,54,876/- in cash and Rs.44,16,000/- by cheque.

3.3 It was stated that the cash component was unreported in tax return for the assessment year 2015-16. The development agreement, without transfer of ownership rights, stated the petitioner, was executed in the financial year 2014-15 and part payment was received by the petitioner, however, full and final payment against was received in the subsequent year, that is, financial year 2015-16.

3.4 The petitioner filed return of income for next assessment year 2016-17 on 30.11.2016 declaring total income of Rs. 2,79,00,570/- including long time capital gain arising out of the said land transaction. The scrutiny assessment was completed under section 143(3) on 10.12.2018.

3.5 Now the reasons for reopening the case of the petitioner on 14.07.2021 may be extracted in its relevant part,

"2. Brief details of information collected/received by the AO:

The undersigned is in receipt of information from Jt. CIT(OSD), Central Circle-2, Baroda. The information pertains to a search assessment proceedings which was carried out on Akshar Group cases, Shri Mehul Patel and Shri Rakesh Patel which revealed that many seized documents pertain to Shri Chhaganlal Murji Dholu, who as per documents seized is among six land owners who have paid cash on-money to the firm GOKULESH INFRA. There is a development agreement between the land owners and Gokulesh Infra firm.

3. Analysis of the information collected/received:

The information contains evidence of the purchase/sale of the property at Revenue Survey No. 28, 29, 31, 32, Gokulesh City Project, Dabhoi Road, Baroda in the form of Sale Deed. As there is a development agreement between Sh. Chaganlal Murji Dholu (one of the land owners) and Gokulesh Infra, Sh. Chaganlal Murji Dholu has received unaccounted cahs amounting to Rs.43,54,876/- an