IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 14336 OF 2021 Shrikant Phulchand Bhakkad (HUF), Through its Karta Shrikant S/o Phulchand Bhakkad, Age : 45 Years, Occu. : Business, R/o Ramjeevan Phulchand Bhakkad, New Mondha Road, Jalna, Tq. & Dist. Jalna.

PAN No. AAPHS6778C .. Petitioner Versus

1. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax Range – 1, Aurangabad.

2. Income Tax Officer, Ward – 1, Jalna, Tq. and Dist. Jalna.

3. Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi. .. Respondents Shri Raviraj R. Chandak, Advocate for the Petitioner.

Shri Alok Sharma, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3.

CORAM : R. D. DHANUKA AND S. G. MEHARE, JJ.

CLOSED FOR JUDGMENT ON : 24.03.2022 JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON : 22.04.2022 JUDGMENT (Per : R. D. Dhanuka, J.) :-

. Rule. Shri Alok Sharma, the learned counsel for respondents waives service. Rule is made returnable forthwith.

2. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has impugned notice dated 31^st March, 2021 issued by the respondent No. 2 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “I. T. Act”) and also order dated 02^nd December, 2021 passed by the respondent No. 3 thereby rejecting the objection filed by the petitioner.

3. Some of the relevant facts for deciding this petition are as under :

It is the case of the petitioner that, on 25^th December, 2018, the then Assessing Officer passed the assessment order for the Assessment Year 2016-2017 after considering all the documents regarding derivative transaction and accepted the loss claimed by the petitioner arising out of said derivative transaction. The Assessing Officer accepted the income claimed by the petitioner in his return for assessment year 2016-2017. On 20^th October, 2018, the petitioner supplied all the relevant information regarding derivative transaction. On 10^th December, 2018, the assessing officer once again called upon the petitioner for the information regarding account statement, demat account, details of broker and contract notes issued by the broker for derivative transaction. It is the case of the petitioner that all the information was duly submitted by the petitioner to the assessing officer on 14^th December, 2018. On 31^st March, 2021, the respondent No. 2 on the same set of facts issued notice U/Sec. 148 of the I. T. Act and started proceeding of re-assessment U/Sec. 147 of the I. T. Act.

4. On 19^th July, 2021, the petitioner after receipt of copy of the reasons recorded by the assessing officer filed his objection to the said reasons and prayed for dropping of the proceedings on the ground that the assessing officer could not have issued such notice on the ground of change of opinion. On 02^nd December, 2021, the respondent No. 3, however, passed speaking order rejecting the objections filed by the petitioner. The petitioner therefore filed this writ petition.

5. Mr. R. R. Chandak, the learned counsel for the petitioner invited our attention to various documents annexed to the writ petition including the income tax return filed by his client for the assessment year 2016-2017 along with computation of income and balance sheet.

6. Learned counsel invited our attention to the assessment order dated 25^th December, 2018 passed by the assessing officer for the assessment year 2016-2017 in respect of income tax return filed by the petitioner and would submit that by the said assessment order, after considering the details furnished by the petitioner in respect of the derivative transaction in the said assessment order passed U/Sec. 143(3) of the I. T. Act, the assessing officer accepted the income returned at Rs. 56,92,100/- without making any additions. He submits that, the then assessing officer has deemed to have applied his mind while accepting income returned by the petitioner for the said assessment year 2016-2017.

7. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, pursuant to the notice dated 31^st March, 2021 issued by the assessing off