Facts of the Case
The petitioner, Rajnish Yadav, was alleged to have received
accommodation entries from a third party, namely Sanjay Jain, and to have made
bogus purchases amounting to ₹11,98,577.
A notice dated 29.03.2023 was issued under Section 148A(b) of
the Income Tax Act, granting time to respond. The petitioner responded on
04.04.2023, highlighting that the material relied upon by the Assessing Officer
(AO) had not been furnished to him.
Despite this, the AO passed an order under Section 148A(d) on
13.04.2023 without supplying the relevant documents, including the statement of
Sanjay Jain recorded under Section 132(4).
Issues Involved
- Whether
an order under Section 148A(d) can be sustained when the material relied
upon is not furnished to the assessee.
- Whether
failure to provide the statement recorded under Section 132(4) violates
principles of natural justice.
- Whether
reassessment proceedings can proceed without giving a proper opportunity
to respond to the material relied upon.
Petitioner’s Arguments
- The
petitioner contended that the AO failed to provide the underlying material
forming the basis of the allegations.
- It
was argued that the statement of Sanjay Jain, relied upon by the
department, was not furnished.
- The
petitioner emphasized violation of principles of natural justice due to
lack of opportunity to effectively respond.
Respondent’s Arguments
- The
Revenue argued based on the existing record and supported the order passed
under Section 148A(d).
- It
was contended that the proceedings were validly initiated based on
available information regarding accommodation entries and bogus purchases.
Court’s Findings / Order
The Delhi High Court observed that:
- The
material relied upon, including the statement under Section 132(4), was
not provided to the petitioner.
- Passing
an order without furnishing such material deprives the assessee of a fair
opportunity to respond.
Accordingly, the Court:
- Set
aside the impugned order dated 13.04.2023 passed under Section 148A(d).
- Directed
the Assessing Officer to conduct a de novo exercise after supplying
all relevant documents.
- Granted
liberty to the petitioner to file a reply after receiving the material.
Important Clarification by the Court
- The
AO must provide all relevant material within two weeks.
- The
petitioner is entitled to file a reply within four weeks thereafter.
- The
AO must consider all contentions, including jurisdictional objections,
before passing a fresh order.
Link to download the order - https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/showFileJudgment/RAS07072023CW89432023_114109.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