Mr. Dharan v. Wp3577-2019.Doc

SANTOSHSUBHASHKULKARNI Digitally signed bySANTOSH SUBHASHKULKARNIDate: 2022.01.2815:02:30 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3577 OF 2019 Nathalal Ranchhod Chamaria, Mumbai...PetitionerVersusThe Income Tax Officer Ward 1(1)(4) and ors....Respondents Mr. Dharan V. Gandhi, for the Petitioner. Mr. Suresh Kumar, for the Respondents. CORAM:K. R. SHRIRAM &N. J. JAMADAR, JJDATED:25[th] JANUARY, 2022(Video Conferencing) -PC: 1.After hearing the Counsels and going through copy of thepetition and affidavit-in-reply, we find that in the order dated19[th] November, 2019, which is also impugned in the petition, bywhich petitioner’s objection to the reopening under Section 148for Assessment Year - 2012-2013 was disposed, the AssessingOfficer has not dealt with all the objections raised by petitioner.For example, in the reasons recorded for reopening, it says onverification of ITS details it is noticed petitioner has receivedRs.17,88,000/- as rent, but, petitioner has offered income of onlyRs.3,26,403/- from house property in his return of income andhence there is a difference of Rs.14,61,597/-. It is quite clear from the statement of income filed by petitioner that petitionerhas disclosed income of Rs.8,94,000/- from house property, butwhat was chargeable under this head was only of Rs.3,26,403/-.It looks like the ITS details has shown double the rental incomeof Rs.8,94,000/- (Rs.8,94,000 X 2 = Rs.17,88,000/-) offered bypetitioner. These points have been raised in petitioner’sobjection dated 18[th] November, 2019 filed through his CharteredAccountant. In the order rejecting objection, the Officer has notdealt with these objections or points raised by petitioner. 2.In the circumstances, order dated 19[th] November, 2019 ishereby quashed and set aside. 3.The matter is remanded to the concerned AssessingOfficer, who shall consider the submissions made by petitionerin letter dated 18[th] November, 2019 and after granting a personalhearing to petitioner pass a fresh order disposing the objectionswithin a period of eight weeks from the date this order isuploaded. The notice of personal hearing shall be given at leastseven days in advance. If the Assessing Officer is going to rely on anyjudgments/orders of any Court or Tribunal to pass an orderdisposing the objection, he shall provide a copy thereof to therepresentative of petitioner in advance so that petitioner’s representative may deal with or distinguish it during thepersonal hearing. The Assessing Officer shall thereafter passdetailed and reasoned order dealing with every point ofobjections raised by petitioner. 4.Petition stands disposed with no order as to costs. [N. J. JAMADAR, J.][K. R. SHRIRAM, J.]