Wp(C)/21046/2022 Of Habeeb v. The Income Tax Officer
High Court
09 Nov 2022 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/21046/2022 Of Habeeb v. The Income Tax Officer
Date of order
09 Nov 2022
Assessment year(s)
2015-2016
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Wp(C)/21046/2022 Of Habeeb v. The Income Tax Officer, the High Court (2022) decided the matter.
Decision: The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
WEDNESDAY, THE 9 DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 18TH KARTHIKA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 21046 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
HABEEBAGED 41 YEARSEDAPPARAYIL PAIPRA PANCHAYAT PEZHAKKAPPILLY P.O, MUVATTUPUZHA ERNAKULAM- 686674 KERALA.BY ADVS.DIVYA RAVINDRANNISHA JOHN
RESPONDENTS:
1THE INCOME TAX OFFICERWARD 1 & TPS THODUPUZHA MAHIMA TOWERS, TEMPLE ROAD THODUPUZHA KERALA-685584.2THE NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, MAYUR BHAWAN, CONNAUGHT LANE, BARAKHAMBA ROAD, NEW DELHI-110 001, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (NAFAC).3THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTER, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT MINISTRY OF FINANCE, ROOM NO. 401, 2ND FLOOR E-RAMP, JAWAHARLAL STADIUM NEW DELHI-1100034THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, I.S. PRESS ROAD, KOCHI-682 018.
ADV. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM (SC)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON09.11.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 09[th] day of November, 2022
The petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by
the fact that while completing the assessment against the petitioner forthe assessment year 2015-2016 vide Ext.P5 order, the assessing officerproceeded to tax an amount of Rs.13,13,20,000/- (Rupees ThirteenCrores thirteen lakhs and twenty thousand only) as unexplained cashdeposits in the savings bank account of the petitioner. It is submitted thatthe amount of the cash deposit is actually Rs.13,13,200/- and notRs.13,13,20000/-. It is submitted that a demand has been raised by thepetitioner following Ext.P5 order treating the unexplained cash depositas Rs.13,13,20,000/-.
2.paragraph 4 it is stated as follows.
The learned Standing Counsel has filed a statement. In
“4.However, now it turns out that the information
regarding the cash deposits made by the petitioner in hissavings bank account with State Bank of India, Paipra ADBtransmitted by the bank to the Income Tax Department asRs. 13,13,20,000/- is in correct. The Branch Manager ofState Bank of India, Paipra ADB by his letter dated12.07.2022 in response to a letter dated 11.07.2022 ofIncome Tax Officer, Ward 1, Thodupuzha has admitted thatthe total cash deposits in the savings bank account of thepetitioner with his bank during the financial year 2014-15was only Rs.1313200/- instead of Rs.13,13,20,000/-wrongly reported in the Annual Information Return filed bythe Bank before the Income Tax Authorities. It has alsofurnished the copy of the statement of accounts for therelevant period in support of this”
3.Having regard to the above, Ext.P5 order of assessment is
quashed, making it clear that the assessment order is being quashed only
on account of the fact that an unexplained cash deposit ofRs.13,13,200/- has been mistakenly treated as unexplained cash deposit
of Rs.13,13,20,000/-. It is clarified that this Court has not found anyother mistake in Ext.P5 order of assessment. It will be open to the
assessing officer to complete the assessment afresh in accordance with
law, with notice to the petitioner.
The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.
RMV
Sd/-
GOPINATH P.JUDGE
PETITIONER EXHIBITSExhibit P1
Exhibit P2Exhibit P3Exhibit P4Exhibit P5
Exhibit P6
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21046/2022
TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENTUNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT, DATED 31.3.2021.TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 16.7.2021, ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 142(1). TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENTUNDER SECTION 142(1) DATED 14.2.2022.
TRUE COPY OF THE, DRAFT ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 8.3.2022, ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 20.3.2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 147 R.W.S144.
assessing officer to complete the assessment afresh in accordance with
law, with notice to the petitioner.
The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.
RMV
Sd/-
GOPINATH P.JUDGE
PETITIONER EXHIBITSExhibit P1
Exhibit P2Exhibit P3Exhibit P4Exhibit P5
Exhibit P6
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21046/2022
TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENTUNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT, DATED 31.3.2021.TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 16.7.2021, ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 142(1). TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENTUNDER SECTION 142(1) DATED 14.2.2022.
TRUE COPY OF THE, DRAFT ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 8.3.2022, ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 20.3.2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 147 R.W.S144.
TRUE COPY OF THE BANK ACCOUNT WITH THE SBI BANK, FROM 7/5/2014 TO 17/4/2015 PAIPRA BRANCH, BEARING A/C NO. 57043747722.
TRUE COPY
P.A.TO JUDGE
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.