JUDGMENT

1. Heard.

2. With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally as the reply has been filed.

3. This writ petition seeks to assail correctness and validity of order dated 29.03.2022 passed by the respondent, whereby, after initiating proceedings under Section 148A (d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (herein after referred to as 'the Act') on the formation of an opinion that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment, the authority proceeded to issue notice under Section 148 of the Act.

4. Brief facts, relevant and necessary for adjudication of the controversy involved in the present writ petition are that on 15.03.2022, the respondent issued notice under clause (b) of Section 148A of the Act on the basis of certain information which suggested that income chargeable to tax for the assessment year 2015-2016 has escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 147 of the Act. The notice was sent along with the details of the cash deposits in the account of the assessee maintained with the Corporation Bank, which according to the notice disclosed deposit of a total amount of Rs. 52,75,000/-. The notice stated that the assessee did not disclose this amount of cash deposit during the relevant financial year and, therefore, on that basis, the proceedings are required to be initiated.

5. Replying to the said notice, the petitioner-assessee stated that the initiation of proceedings on the basis that the cash deposits during the relevant financial year are Rs. 52,75,000/- is factually incorrect and according to the petitioner-assessee, the total amount of cash deposit in his bank account in the Corporation Bank was only Rs. 19,39,000/-. The petitioner-assessee, in order to satisfy the authority that the total cash deposits in that particular financial year were only Rs. 19,39,000/-, also annexed along with the reply, complete bank statement of transactions done during the financial year in question.

6. The competent authority, however, proceeded to pass an order for issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act on 29.03.2022. Thereafter, a notice under Section 148 of the Act has been issued to the petitioner-assessee. The order dated 29.03.2022 passed under Section 149A (d) of the Act as also notice under Section 148 of the Act have been assailed in this petition.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner-assessee contended before us that in order to initiate proceedings under Section 148 of the Act, the law requires the authority to first arrive at satisfaction after holding an enquiry in terms of provisions contained in Section 148A of the Act based on material available on record which must suggest that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. He would further contend that in case this exercise is under taken beyond a period of three years with reference to the concerned assessment year, the proceedings under Section 148 of the Act could be initiated only when the total amount of the alleged income which is said to have escaped assessment is more than Rs. 50,00,000/-, otherwise such exercise may not lead to proceedings under Section 148A of the Act because of statutory impediment under Section 149 Sub-Section 1 Clause (b) of the Act.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner-assessee vehemently contended that the entire material, which has been collected by the authority, does not contain any material to even remotely suggest that the total income which according to them escaped assessment is more than Rs. 50,00,000/-. Only on conjecture that the assessee may have some more bank accounts, order has been passed under Section 148A (d) of the Act followed by notice under Section 148 of the Act. Therefore, it is argued, the order and proceedings are liable to be set aside.

9. Per-contra, learned counsel appearing for the revenue would submit that the authority has drawn detailed proceedings after giving proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner-assessee by issuing notice under Section 148A. Pursuant to the notice, the