Facts of the Case
The
present writ petition pertains to Assessment Year (AY) 2019–20, wherein the
petitioners were subjected to reassessment proceedings initiated under Section
148A(b) of the Income Tax Act.
The
Revenue alleged that the petitioners were beneficiaries of accommodation
entries provided by one Ankit Jain (Proprietor of Rishabh Trading Company)
amounting to ₹1,15,10,016.
The
petitioners:
- Filed replies dated
31.03.2023 and 05.04.2023
- Asserted that:
- Purchases worth
₹70,10,016 were genuine
- Sales worth ₹45 lakhs
were also legitimate
- Denied allegations of
bogus transactions
Despite
these submissions, the Assessing Officer (AO) proceeded with reassessment and
passed an order under Section 148A(d).
Issues Involved
- Whether reassessment
proceedings can be initiated without tangible material linking the
assessee to alleged accommodation entries
- Whether non-supply of
approval for reassessment proceedings vitiates the proceedings
- Whether reliance on a
third-party statement without specific reference to the assessee is
valid
Petitioner’s Arguments
- No material existed to
justify initiation of reassessment proceedings
- The statement of Ankit
Jain (dated 07.11.2019):
- Did not mention the
petitioners
- An affidavit by Ankit
Jain confirmed:
- Transactions with
petitioners were genuine
- Petitioners even
offered:
- Production of Ankit
Jain for examination
- Mandatory approval for
reassessment:
- Not provided to
petitioners
Respondent’s Arguments
- The AO had relevant
material to initiate reassessment
- Relied on:
- Statement of Ankit
Jain (particularly response to Question 18)
- Claimed:
- Evidence indicated
possible unaccounted cash transactions
Court’s Findings / Order
The Court
observed:
- The only material
relied upon was:
- A statement admitting
out-of-book cash transactions of ₹16,29,423
- Crucially:
- No reference to the
petitioners was found in the statement
- Revenue failed to:
- Produce any material
linking petitioners to alleged accommodation entries
- Approval for
reassessment:
- Not furnished to
petitioners
Final Order
- Impugned notice under
Section 148A(b) and order under Section 148A(d) set aside
- Liberty granted to AO:
- To reinitiate proceedings in accordance with law
Important Clarifications
- Mere general admission
of wrongdoing by a third party is insufficient
- There must be:
- Specific nexus
between assessee and alleged transactions
- Procedural compliance
(like approval disclosure):
- Is mandatory in reassessment proceeding
Sections Involved
- Section 148A(b) –
Notice before reassessment
- Section 148A(d) –
Order after considering reply
- Income Tax Act, 1961
- Need for tangible
material
- Protection against mechanical
reopening of assessments
Link to download the order - https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/showFileJudgment/60827092023CW128132023_165140.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment