Ambika Kapur v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Taxcentralcircle Int Tax 2(1)(2) New Delhi & Anr

$~S-27 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI +W.P.(C) 12733/2022 & CM APPLs.38702-38703/2022 AMBIKA KAPUR .....Petitioner Through:Mr.GauravJain,AdvocatewithMs.AkshitaGoyal,Mr.ShubhamGuptaandMr.AdityaGoyal,Advocate.Ms.AkshitaGoyal,Mr.ShubhamGuptaandMr.AdityaGoyal,Advocate. versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXCENTRALCIRCLE INT TAX 2(1)(2) NEW DELHI & ANR. .....RespondentsThrough:Mr.Sanjay Kumar, Advocate withMs.Easha Kadian, Advocate. % Date of Decision: 5[th]September, 2022 CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHANHON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORAJ U D G M E N T MANMOHAN, J (Oral): 1.Present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 21[st]April, 2022 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961(‘the Act’) along with notice dated 21[st]April, 2022 issued under Section 148of the Act for the assessment year 2018-19 and proceedings initiatedpursuant thereto. 2.Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the Respondent initiatedthe proceedings under Section 148A of the Act on the basis of an incorrectassumption of fact that the petitioner had not filed her return of income and hence income to the tune of Rs.30,57,78,545/- in relation to financialtransactions entered by the Petitioner during the year, had escapedassessment. 3.Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the Petitioner filed adetailed reply dated 14[th]April, 2022, wherein the Petitioner explained to theRespondent that contrary to the allegations, the Petitioner had filed return ofincome for the relevant assessment year and further disclosed all thefinancial transactions alleged to have escaped assessment in the said returnof income, except for one alleged transaction amounting to Rs.3,79,08,575/-of which the Petitioner had no knowledge and further requested theRespondent to provide details about the said transaction. 4.Issue notice. Mr.Sanjay Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents-revenue, accepts notice. He states that the petitioner had not providedsale/purchase deed to the Assessing Officer and had not explained thetransaction qua the amount of Rs.3,79,08,575/-. 5.In rejoinder, learned counsel for the petitioner states that thesale/purchase deed was never asked for by the Assessing Officer. He statesthat the petitioner is willing to supply the same, if so directed by this Court.He further states that the ‘statement of reportable account under Section285BA(1) of the Act is not a transaction. He submits that Section 285BA(1)of the Act casts a duty/obligation on the financial institution or bank toforward the details with regard to the high value transactions to the IncomeTax Department. 6.Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds that theprimary allegation in the notice issued under Section 148A(b) of the Act isthat the petitioner has not filed ITR for the assessment year 2018-19. However, as the said fact has been rebutted by the petitioner, the AssessingOfficer should have given a finding with regard to this fact at least in theorder passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act. Further, as it is thepetitioner’s case that all the high value transactions have been reported bythe petitioner in its return of income and is willing to place on record thesale/purchase deed before the Assessing Officer, this Court sets aside theimpugned order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act as well as thenotice issued under Section 148 and remands the matter back to theAssessing Officer for a fresh decision in accordance with law. It shall beopen to the Assessing Officer to issue a supplementary notice explaining indetail the transactions, which were allegedly not reported by the petitionertotalling to Rs.3,79,08,575/-, within two weeks. The petitioner is alsodirected to file the sale/purchase deed as well as a supplementary reply, ifrequired, with the Assessing Officer within four weeks. The AssessingOfficer is directed to pass a fresh order under Section 148A(d) of the Actwithin four weeks thereafter in accordance with law.