Vidisha Singhal v. Income Tax Officer Ward 29(1) Delhi & Ors

Signature Not Verified $~A-1 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI +W.P.(C) 14989/2022 & CM APPL.46231/2022 VIDISHA SINGHAL ..... PetitionerThrough:Dr.RakeshGupta,AdvocatewithMr.Somil Agarwal and Mr.AnshulMittal, Advocates. Versus INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 29(1) DELHI & ORS ..... RespondentsThrough:Mr.AbhishekMaratha,Sr.StandingCounsel. Date of Decision: 16[th]November, 2022 % CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHANHON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA J U D G M E N T MANMOHAN, J (Oral): CM APPL.46232/2022 (exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) 14989/2022 & CM APPL.46231/2022 1.Present writ petition has been filed challenging the notice issuedunder Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) dated 29[th]May, 2022, order passed under Section 148A(d) dated 22[nd]July, 2022 andimpugned notice issued under Section 148 dated 23[rd]July, 2022. 2.Learned Counsel for the Petitioner states that in the Section 148A(b)notice, transactions worth Rs.50,40,000/- having escaped assessment wereattributed to Mr.Dayanand Singh and transaction worth Rs.48,54,000/- wasattributed to Lifeline Securities Limited. He, however, states that in theimpugned order under Section 148A(d), the entities and the amount havebeen swapped i.e. Rs.50,40,000/- transaction is now attributed to LifelineSecurities Limited and not to Mr.Dayanand Singh. 3.In pursuance to the last order, the Assessing Officer is personallypresent in Court today. He admits that the impugned order passed underSection 148A(d) of the Act is riddled with mistakes. He further admits thatin the notice issued under Section 148A(b) of the Act, the details of thetransactions allegedly carried out by the petitioner were not correct. Hestates that the transactions were clarified by the ITO (Inv), Unit-7, Delhi inits e-mail dated 14[th]July, 2022, which he had incorporated in the orderpassed under Section 148A(d) of the Act. 4.Keeping in view the aforesaid statements, the impugned order passedunder Section 148A(d) and the impugned notice issued under Section 148 ofthe Act are set aside and the Assessing Officer is directed to issue anamended notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act along with theincriminating material in its possession to the assessee within two weeks.The assessee is given liberty to file a reply to the amended notice within four Signature Not Verified weeks. The Assessing Officer is, thereafter, directed to decide the matterafresh within a further period of four weeks in accordance with law.5.With the aforesaid directions and liberty, the present writ petition andapplication stand disposed of. The rights and contentions of all the partiesare left open. MANMOHAN, J MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J NOVEMBER 16, 2022TS