The court reinforced that reassessment cannot occur without tangible evidence linking the belief of income escaping assessment to the material facts disclosed, emphasizing strict adherence to procedural norms post-2021 amendments.

ORAL ORDER

In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

(a) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari or order quashing the notice issued under section 148 in PAN:AAACK6734C dated: 30.3.2018 by Respondent No.3 marked as Annexure-K for the A.Y.2011- 12 as bad in law.

(b) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari or order quashing the letter in F.No.ITO-W- 4(1)(2)/AAACK6734C/2018-19 dated:26.10.2018 issued by Respondent No.3 disposing of the legal objections raised by the petitioner for reopening of the assessment under section 147 marked as Annexure-V for the A.Y.2011-12, as one without jurisdiction.

(c) Declare that Respondent No.3 erred in law in invoking the provisions of section 147 of the Act on mere surmises, conjectures and suspicions without having any reasons to believe as contemplated under the provisions of section 147 of the Act.

(d) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari or order to forebear the Respondent No. 3 from giving effect and / or taking any step whatsoever pursuant to and/or in furtherance of the notice u/s 148 of the Act in No.AAACK6734C dated: 30.03.2018 and/or in any proceedings initiated thereunder for the assessment year 2011-12. Annexure-K (e) Such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.”

2. Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record.

3. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the memorandum of petition and referring to the material on record, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner invited my attention to the assessment proceedings initiated by the respondents against the petitioner for the assessment year 2011- 12 in order to point out that as can be seen from the assessment order dated 26.03.2014, the issue of taxability of the Stock in Trade and pursuant to the Joint Development Agreement was examined by the respondents, who issued a notice under Section 142 of the Income Tax Act dated 10.02.2014 pursuant to which, the petitioner submitted a detailed reply. It is submitted that despite having accepted the explanation and passing the assessment order dated 26.03.2014, the respondents have purported to re-open by issue of notice on 30.03.2018, without there being any tangible material to come to the conclusion that there was escapement of income from assessment and the reasons do not have a live link to the formation of such belief and as such, the impugned notice and all further proceedings pursuant thereto deserve to be quashed.

4. It is submitted that though the petitioner has submitted a detailed reply, the respondents have proceeded to pass the impugned reassessment order at Annexure-V dated 26.10.2018 rejecting the objections of the petitioner, who is before this Court by way of the present petition.

5. In support of his submissions, learned Senior Counsel places reliance upon the following judgments:

i) Commissioner Of Income Tax, Delhi Vs. M/S. Kelvinator Of India Ltd – (2010) 187 Taxman 312 (SC)

ii) Azim Premji Trustee Co. P. Ltd. v. DCIT , [2023] 146 taxmann.com 58 (Karnataka)

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent- revenue would invite my attention to the impugned communication dated 02.