SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Guj) 1589

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
N.V. ANJARIA, BHARGAV D. KARIA, JJ.
Vijay Ramanlal Sanghvi – Petitioner
Versus
The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cirlce 2(1)(2) – Respondent
R/Special Civil Application No. 19010 of 2018
Decided On : 16-12-2022

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Tushar Hemani, Sr. Adv. with MS. Vaibhavi K. Parikh.
For the Respondent: Mr. Varun K. Patel.

Headnote:

Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226, 14 - Income Tax Act, 1961 - Section 148, 147, 143(3), (1), 2(40), 151 - Assessment Year - Reopening of assessment proceedings - Stay proceedings for Assessment Year - Challenged notice for reopening of assessment proceedings for Assessment Year and also prayed to stay further proceedings for Assessment Year - Held, Court is of opinion that under guise of reopening assessment, Assessing Officer wants to have a roving inquiry - Under circumstances, in absence of any tangible material to form an opinion that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment and in absence of any satisfaction recorded by the Assessing Officer by merely relying upon the information received from the Office of DCIT Central Circle 2(2), Mumbai, the impugned action of reopening the assessment while exercising power under section 148 of the Act cannot be sustained - impugned notice under section 148 of the Act, 1961 is not tenable in law and is accordingly quashed and set aside – Ordered accordingly.

JUDGMENT :

[Bhargav D. Karia, J.]

1. Heard learned Senior Advocate Mr. Tushar Hemani with Ms. Vaibhavi K. Parikh for the petitioner and learned advocate Mr. Varun K. Patel for the respondent.

2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the notice dated 27.03.2018 issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (For short “the Act”) for reopening of the assessment proceedings for the Assessment Year 2011-2012 and also prayed to stay the further proceedings for the Assessment Year 2011-2012.

3. Brief facts of the case are as under :

3.1) The petitioner-assessee is a Director in Ratnaveer Stainless Products Pvt. Ltd., situated at GIDC Savli, Manjusar, Vadodara.

3.2) It is the case of the petitioner that during the Assessment Year 2011-2012, the petitioner received certain funds from Prraneta Industries Ltd. (Now known as Aadhar Venture India Ltd) and the same were repaid during before the end of the year under consideration which included a sum aggregating to Rs. 2,10,00,000/- received through Real Time Gross Settlement (RTGS) on 02.02.2011.

3.3) The petitioner filed original return of income for the year under consideration on 25.08.2011 declaring total income at Rs.19,03,430/-.

3.4) It is the case of the petitioner that after a period of four years from the end of relevant assessment year, the respondent issued the impugned notice dated 27.03.2018 under section 148 for reopening the assessment for the year under consideration.

3.5) The petitioner filed return of income for the year under consideration on 25.04.2018 and submitted copy of such return of income to the respondent vide letter dated 26.04.2018 and requested the respondent to supply the copy of reasons recorded for reopening.

3.6) Accordingly, the respondents supplied the copy of reasons recorded for reopening of the assessment dated 18.07.2018 for the Assessment Year 2011-2012. The reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for reopening the assessment under section 147 of the Act read as under :

    “1. The assessee is an individual having present residential address at 20, Vijay Society-1, New Khanderao Road, Vadodara, Gujarat - 390004. He is director in Ratanveer Stainless Products Private Limited, GIDC Savli, Manjusar, Vadodara. He has filed his return of income in ITR-2 on 25.08.2011 at total income of Rs. 19,03,430/- (after deduction of Rs one lakh under chapter VI-A) which includes salary income of Rs 12 lakh, short term capital gain of Rs 7,66,586/- and income from other sources of Rs. 36,845/-.

2. The information from the DCIT Central Circle 2(2), Mumbai has been received on 26.03.2018 through letter dated 19.03.2018 of the DCIT, Circle 2(1)(1), Vadodara. As per the information, Shri Vijay R. Sanghvi, has obtained three accommodation entries of Rs. 70 lakh each (total 2.1 Cr) all on 02.02.2011 which were credited in CITI Bank NA, Vadodara in the bank account of shri Vijay R. Sanghvi. The said debits were made from bank account of Prraneta Industries Ltd. now known as Aadhar Venture India Ltd.

3. All three entries of Rs 70 lakh each totaling to Rs 2.1 Cr were obtained by shri Vijay R. Sanghvi on a single day on 2.2.2011 are not commensurate with the return filed by the assessee in ITR-2 for the A.Y. 2011-12. In return filed, bank account details are not mentioned. Besides salary income and other income shown, short term capital gain shown in the return is Rs 7,66,586/- only. Such huge amount of Rs 2.1 Cr received in case of an individual whose main source of income is salary income as director of a company prima facie show the transaction as non genuine transaction.

4. As per ITS data, assessee had entered in to sale/purchase of shares for total amount of transactions being of Rs 8,11,00,174/- in 161 transactions of such sales and purchases. Further, it was observed that out of 161 such transactions, 159 transactions are related to transactions in shares of Chandni Textile Engineering Ind. Ltd. during two m

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top