D.b. Civil Writ Petition v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 6, Jaipur2. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-4,Jaipur.2. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Centra

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11782/2025 Sandeep Stocks Pvt. Ltd., having Its Registered Office At A-40 A,Bajaj Nagar, Opposite Gandhinagar Railway Station, Jaipur-302015, Through Its Director Mr. Sandeep Sharma S/o BudhiPrakash Sharma, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Aa-5, Anita Colony,Bajaj Nagar, Jaipur-302015. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 6, Jaipur2. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-4,Jaipur.2. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-4,Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sanjay Jhanwar, Sr. Adv. assisted by Mr. Rajat Sharma & Mr. Saksham Pandey, Adv. by Mr. Rajat Sharma & Mr. Saksham Pandey, Adv. : Mr. Sandeep Pathak HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEET PUROHIT 07/08/2025 Order 1. Present writ petition has been filed impugning the orderdated 23.05.2025 passed by the respondents, whereby theobjection notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961(for short ‘Act of 1961’) has been disposed of. 2. Brief facts need to be noted are that the petitioner is aCompany engaged in the business of trading in shares andsecurities. It had filed return for assessment year 2011-2012which was scrutinized under Section 143(2) of the Act of 1961.Notice under Section 148 of the Act of 1961 was served on the petitioner-Company upon disclosure of bogus share losstransaction and reasons were supplied to the assessee vide letterdated 26.09.2016 pointing out that the assessee was one of thebeneficiaries who received bogus share, which was on the basis oftheir admittedly accommodation entries in the form of bogusLTCG. Upon recording of statement of such promoters/Directorsunder Section 132(4) of the Act and upon duly conducting survey/search operations, it was found that the assessee was one of suchbeneficiaries and, therefore, a notice under Section 148 of the Actof 1961 providing the reasons was issued on 27.09.2016 ofescapementoftaxassessmentworthincomeofRs.23,02,91,301./-. Objections and reply to the notice were filedby the petitioner-Company wherein, after raising objections tomaintainability of the assessment proceedings under Section 148of the Act, to submit detailed reply, the documents may beprovided. 3. Based on such reply, the respondents passed an orderdisposing of the objections and rejected the same. It was alsostated that so far as details of information with regard to surveyand search are concerned, the same cannot be entertained at thesaid stage. 4.Feeling aggrieved, petitioner-Company preferred S.B.CivilWrit Petition No.7463/2017- Sandeep Stocks Pvt. Ltd. Vs.Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr., which came tobe decided on 12.02.2025 and this Court proceeded to set asidethe order dated 17.02.2017 and remitted the matter back to therespondents to decide the objections in accordance with law after 3. Based on such reply, the respondents passed an orderdisposing of the objections and rejected the same. It was alsostated that so far as details of information with regard to surveyand search are concerned, the same cannot be entertained at thesaid stage. 4.Feeling aggrieved, petitioner-Company preferred S.B.CivilWrit Petition No.7463/2017- Sandeep Stocks Pvt. Ltd. Vs.Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr., which came tobe decided on 12.02.2025 and this Court proceeded to set asidethe order dated 17.02.2017 and remitted the matter back to therespondents to decide the objections in accordance with law after considering the law laid down by the Supreme Court in GKNDriveshafts (India) Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer and Ors.-259 IRT Page 19. Personal hearing was also directed to begiven to the petitioner-Company in terms of the directions of theHigh Court in Sandeep Stocks Pvt. Ltd.(supra) dated12.02.2025. The respondents proceeded to dispose of theobjections raised on 02.02.2017 and also at the same time,provided the available material sought by the assessee. Havingreceived the entire documents as demanded, the petitioner-Company with the purpose to delay the proceedings, has againpreferred writ petition and submits that the Court intended thepetitioner-Company to allow it to again make objection afterreceiving the documents. The petitioner submits that despitespecific directions, the respondents have failed to produce anymaterial evidence or recorded the material linking the petitioner-Company and there was no reason which was available orrecorded for initiating re-assessment. The petitioner furthersubmits that respondents were seeking to reopen the concludedassessment solely on the basis of third-party allegations and thatno tangible nexus existed between the petitioner-Company andthe purported entry operators. 5. We have considered the submissions and find that thepetitioner-Company has been avoiding the proceedings underSection 148 of the Act of 1961 initiated against it with reference toassessment year 2011-2012 on 26.09.2016. Section 148 of the ofthe Act of 1961 as it stood provided as under:- “148. Issue of notice where income has escapedassessment.- Before making the assessment,reassessment or recomputation under section 147,and subject to the provisions of section 148A, theAssessing Officer shall serve on the assessee anotice, along with a copy of the order passed, ifrequired, under clause (d) of section 148A, requiringhim to furnish within a period of three months fromthe end of the month in which such notice is issued,or such further period as may be allowed by theAssessing Officer on the basis of an application madein this regard by the assessee, a return of his incomeor the income of any other person in respect of whichhe is assessable under this Act during the previousyear corresponding to the relevant assessment year,in the prescribed form and verified in the prescribedmanner and setting forth such other particulars asmay be prescribed; and the provisions of this Actshall, so far as may be, apply accordingly as if suchreturn were a return required to be furnished undersection 139: Provided that no notice under this section shall beissued unless there is information with the AssessingOfficer which suggests that the income chargeable totax has escaped assessment in the case of theassessee for the relevant assessment year and theAssessing Officer has obtained prior approval of thespecified authority to issue such notice: Provided further that no such approval shall berequired where the Assessing Officer, with the priorapproval of the specified authority, has passed anorder under clause (d) of section 148A to the effectthat it is a fit case to issue a notice under thissection: Provided that no notice under this section shall beissued unless there is information with the AssessingOfficer which suggests that the income chargeable totax has escaped assessment in the case of theassessee for the relevant assessment year and theAssessing Officer has obtained prior approval of thespecified authority to issue such notice: Provided further that no such approval shall berequired where the Assessing Officer, with the priorapproval of the specified authority, has passed anorder under clause (d) of section 148A to the effectthat it is a fit case to issue a notice under thissection: Provided also that any return of income, required tobe furnished by an assessee under this section andfurnished beyond the period allowed shall not bedeemed to be a return under Section 139. Explanation1.—For the purposes of this section andsection 148A, the information with the AssessingOfficer which suggests that the income chargeable totax has escaped assessment means,— (i) any information in the case of the assessee for therelevant assessment year in accordance with the riskmanagement strategy formulated by the Board fromtime to time; or (ii) any audit objection to the effect that theassessment in the case of the assessee for therelevant assessment year has not been made inaccordance with the provisions of this Act; or (iii) any information received under an agreementreferred to in section 90 or section 90A of the Act; or (iv) any information made available to the AssessingOfficer under the scheme notified under section135A; or (v) any information which requires action inconsequence of the order of a Tribunal or a Court; or Explanation 2.—For the purposes of this section,where,— (i) a search is initiated under section 132 or books ofaccount, other documents or any assets arerequisitioned under section 132A, on or after the 1stday of April, 2021, in the case of the assessee; or (ii) a survey is conducted under section 133A, otherthan under sub-section (2A) of that section, on orafter the 1st day of April, 2021, in the case of theassessee; or (iii) the Assessing Officer is satisfied, with the priorapproval of the Principal Commissioner orCommissioner, that any money, bullion, jewellery orother valuable article or thing, seized or requisitionedunder section 132 or section 132A in case of anyother person on or after the 1st day of April, 2021,belongs to the assessee; or (iv) the Assessing Officer is satisfied, with the priorapproval of Principal Commissioner or Commissioner,that any books of account or documents, seized orrequisitioned under section 132 or section 132A incase of any other person on or after the 1st day ofApril, 2021, pertains or pertain to, or any informationcontained therein, relate to, the assessee, theAssessing Officer shall be deemed to haveinformation which suggests that the incomechargeable to tax has escaped assessment in thecase of the assessee [where] the search is initiatedor books of account, other documents or any assetsare requisitioned or survey is conducted in the caseof the assessee or money, bullion, jewellery or othervaluable article or thing or books of account ordocuments are seized or requisitioned in case of anyother person. Explanation 3.—For the purposes of this section,specified authority means the specified authorityreferred to in section 151.” Explanation 3.—For the purposes of this section,specified authority means the specified authorityreferred to in section 151.” Thus, the only aspect which is to be looked into at this stageis whether the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment,since the objection of the petitioner-Company was that thematerial has not been found to it which was the basis of arrivingto the satisfaction and the Court allowed to raise the saidobjection, the authorities cannot be said to find out any error indisposing of the original documents made by it on 02.02.2017 andalso supplying it with the said disposal order, the material whichwas relied upon for the purposes of arriving to the satisfaction ofthe escapement of income of the assessee. The assessee,therefore, cannot be allowed to state now that the details havebeen provided to it only alongwith the order passed. The order,therefore, does not warrant any interference by this Court. It maybe noticed that earlier judgment passed by this Court in Sandeep Stocks Pvt. Ltd. (supra) was challenged by the petitioner-Company before the Supreme Court in SLP (C) No.10014/2025where the Supreme Court passed following order:- “1. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for thepetitioner and having gone through the materials on record,we find no good ground to interfere with the impugnedorder passed by the High Court. petitioner and having gone through the materials on record,we find no good ground to interfere with the impugnedorder passed by the High Court. 2. The Special Leave Petition is, accordingly, dismissed. 3. However, all questions of law are kept open to becanvassed before the authority concerned including theissue of limitation.canvassed before the authority concerned including theissue of limitation. 4. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.” 6. In view thereof, we do not find any reason to interfere withthe order passed by the respondents and leave thethe order passed by the respondents and leave the petitioner-Company in terms of the directions of the SupremeCourt to canvass all its arguments before the authority concerned. 7. The writ petition is accordingly, dismissed. Pendingapplications, if any, also stand disposed of. (SANJEET PUROHIT),J(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J NAVAL KISHOR /83