Zelos Developers Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 25(1)Delhi

$~47 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI +W.P.(C) 13654/2022 & C.M.No.41637/2022 ZELOS DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED..... Petitioner Through:Mr.Mayank Nagi with Mr.PulkitVerma, Advocates. versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 25(1)DELHI..... Respondent Through:Mr.Sunil Agarwal, Sr.StandingCounsel for the Revenue withMr.Tushar Gupta and Mr.UtkarshTiwari, Advocates. %Date of Decision: 21[st]September, 2022 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHANHON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORAJ U D G M E N T MANMOHAN, J (Oral): 1.Present writ petition has been filed challenging the order passed underSection 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) as well as theconsequential notice issued under Section 148 of the Act, both dated 30[th]July, 2022, for the Assessment Year 2016-17. 2.Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that reassessment was doneon the allegation that sale of immovable property worth Rs.13,65,00,000/-had escaped assessment. He states that the basis of the allegations are that W.P.(C) No.13654/2022 the purchaser’s PAN and Sale deeds were not on record as well as the stampduty valuation of the transaction was not on record. 3.Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the allegations againstthe Petitioner are factually incorrect. He states that the Petitioner / seller aswell as the Purchaser i.e. Sh. Narinder Singh Dhingra have valid PANs andthe same were also on record, interalia, in the form of the Annual TaxStatement under Section 203AA in Form 26AS. He states that income taxreturn for the Assessment Year 2016-17 has been filed on 17[th]October, 2016where "Revenue from Operations" have been declared under three heads –(i) Sale of Property Rights; (ii) Project Revenue; and (iii) ConsultancyServicesandtotalincomehasbeenreturnedataprofitofRs.2,97,20,825.16/-. 4.Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that vide notice dated 14[th]March, 2018 issued under Section 133(6) of the Act, the Petitioner wasdirected to file details relating to the alleged transaction. He states that videreply dated 26[th]March, 2018, the Petitioner filed a detailed note on itsbusiness activities; audited financial statements, tax audit report, return ofincome and computation of total income; the transaction ledger, salesaccount along with the registered sale deed. He points out that stamp dutyvaluation of the property in question is duly stated in the registered saledeed. He states that, therefore, it is clear that the Revenue had knowledge ofmaterial relating to the transaction involving the sale of 24 units amountingto Rs.13,65,00,000/- . He points out that after examination of the materialplaced on record by the Petitioner, the proceeding under Section 133(6) ofthe Act was dropped. W.P.(C) No.13654/2022 5.Issue notice.Mr.Sunil Agarwal, learned senior standing counselaccepts notice on behalf of the Respondent-Revenue. He, on instructions,states that though the Petitioner in its response to the notice issued underSection 148A(b) of the Act had filed a detailed reply, yet annexures attachedthereto were not placed on record. He further states that he has no objectionif the impugned order and notice are set aside and the matter is remandedback to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision. 6.Keeping in view the aforesaid, the impugned order passed underSection 148A(d) of Act as well as the notice issued under Section 148 of theAct, both dated 30[th]July, 2022 are set aside and the Petitioner is directed tore-supply its reply to the notice issued under Section 148A(b) of the Actalongwith all annexures, to the Assessing Officer within a week.TheAssessing Officer shall, thereafter, pass an order under Section 148A(d) ofthe Act in accordance with law within six weeks.It is clarified that theAssessing Officer shall be at liberty to seek any further clarification/information from the Petitioner. 7.With the aforesaid directions, present writ petition along with pendingapplication stands disposed of. MANMOHAN, J SEPTEMBER 21, 2022KA 6.Keeping in view the aforesaid, the impugned order passed underSection 148A(d) of Act as well as the notice issued under Section 148 of theAct, both dated 30[th]July, 2022 are set aside and the Petitioner is directed tore-supply its reply to the notice issued under Section 148A(b) of the Actalongwith all annexures, to the Assessing Officer within a week.TheAssessing Officer shall, thereafter, pass an order under Section 148A(d) ofthe Act in accordance with law within six weeks.It is clarified that theAssessing Officer shall be at liberty to seek any further clarification/information from the Petitioner. 7.With the aforesaid directions, present writ petition along with pendingapplication stands disposed of. MANMOHAN, J SEPTEMBER 21, 2022KA MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J W.P.(C) No.13654/2022 Page 3 of 3