Salasar Services Insurance Brokers Pvt Ltd v. Assistant Commssioner Of Income Tax And Ors

OD – 5 ORDER SHEETWPO/2412/2022IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTACONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTIONORIGINAL SIDE SALASAR SERVICES INSURANCE BROKERS PVT LTD. VS ASSISTANT COMMSSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ORS BEFORE:The Hon'ble JUSTICE MD. NIZAMUDDINDate : 17[th] August, 2022. Appearance:Mr. Sudhir Mehta, Adv.Mr. Anurag Bagaria, Adv.Ms. Riya Debnath, Adv.…For the PetitionerMr. Tilok Mitra, Adv.…For the respondents The Court : Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties. By this writ petition petitioner has challenged the impugned orderdated 30[th] July, 2022 under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961and subsequent notice under Section 148 of the Act dated 30[th] July,2022 relating to assessment year 2014-15. On perusal of recordsannexed to the writ petition and findings by the assessing officer in hisorder dated 30[th] July, 2022, I am not inclined to entertain this writpetition since I did not find any procedural irregularity or violation of anyprinciples of natural justice or the impugned order and notice arecontrary to any provision of law and further in view of the finding of factin the impugned order under Section 148A(d) inter alia which reads asfollows : “In response thereof, the assessee claimed that they have not madeany transactions with M/s. Tridev Infra Contractors Pvt. Ltd. during the year under consideration But from the perusal of the same document, ithas also been gathered that the assessee has received funds from M/s.Culminating Management Pvt. Ltd. As per the investigation report M/s.Culminating Management Pvt. Ltd. also being managed and controlled byKamal Jain who is an entry operator. Hence, the transaction remainsunexplained beyond reasonable doubt. In the light of the above facts and discussion and on the basis ofmaterial available on record including the assessee’s reply, there is anamount of Rs. 91,85,430/- chargeable to tax which has escapedassessment in the instant case and the undersigned is of the opinionthat it is a fit case to issue a notice u/s. 148 of the I T Act, 1961.” Furthermore issuance of notice under Section 148 itself is not anassessment or also does not amount to raising of demand and if at allpetitioner has any case for dropping the impugned reassessmentproceeding it will have ample opportunity in course of reassessmentproceeding to satisfy the assessing officer for dropping the same. In view of the discussion made above, this writ petition being WPO2412 of 2022 is dismissed. However, dismissal of this writ petition will not be a bar for thepetitioner to raise all the points in this writ petition in course of theimpugned reassessment proceeding. (MD. NIZAMUDDIN, J.) TR/