M/s. Chanda Anjaiah Parameshwar vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

It may be mentioned that petitioner is an assessee under the Act having the status of Hindu Undivided Family

On 7O .06.2021 , notice was issued by respondent Following the decision of India v. Ashish No. 1 undt:r Section 148 of the Act. of the Supreme Colrrt in Union Agarwall, the aforesaid notice was construed to be a notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act which was reiterated by the notice dated 23.O5.2022. As per the aforesaid notice, it was alleged that as per information received, petitioner had received credit of Rs.305.72 crores in his current account during the period from 06.02.2013 to 04.12.2O14 out of which petitioner had received Rs.304.O5 crores in cash. The aforesaid credit was not disclosed by the petitioner in its income tax return. The same was also not disclosed | 2022 SCC Ontine SC 543

It is submitted that the petitioner had submitted a detailed reply explaining the above transaction and contending that there was no suppression. Nonetheless, respondent No.1 passed the order dated 30.07.2O22 under Section 148A(d) of the Act holding that the cash deposit of Rs.304.O5 crores appears to be unexplained credit; there is reason to believe that an amount of Rs.304.05 crores escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 147 of the Act. After obtaining prior approval of the higher

We are unable to accept the above contentions of the petitioner. On going through the order dated 3O.O7.2O22, we find that reply of the petitioner dated 02.06.2022 was considered by respondent No. l, whereafter the same was not accepted holding the present case to be a fit one for issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act. It was held as follows: "The submissions of the assessee have been considered. In the instant case, the assessee has received the credits of Rs.305.72 crores in his current account No.0O4805000611 between the period from 5 ( I I 06.02.2013 to O4.L2.2O14. Out of which he received Rs.304.05 crores in cash. The assessee has not disclosed this bank account in his ITR hled for the year under consideration i.e., 2013-14. The assessee has asked at several instances in his reply to this office for materials on which this ofiice has come to conclusion that the amount o[ Rs.304.05 crores has escaped assessment. This information has already been provided to the assessee. Further, in this connection, it is pertinent to mention here the onus of providing and proving transactions are genuine, lies with ttre assessee itsetf. The assessee has not submitted any details regarding from whom he has received the amount and for what purpose, The assessee merely submitted he is a bullion trader, but he has not provided necessary documents to substantiate sale of bullion via cash. In this connection the cash deposits of Rs.3O4.05 crores appears to be unexplained credits, hence tl:ere is reason to believe that an amount of Rs.304.O5 crores has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the I.T.Act. Hence, in light of the above facts, it is apparent that the income of Rs.304.05 crores received has escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 147 of the I.T.Act. Therefore, it is a fit case for issue of notice u/s.148 ofthe I.T.Act, 1961."

We are at a stage of issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act. As a matter of fact, an order under Section 148A(d) is on the point as to whether notice under Section 148 of the Act is to be issued or not. At this stage I t

Therefore, in the f;rcts and circumstances, we are not at all inclined to interdict the proceedings initiated by the respondents for reassessment at the threshold.

Writ petition is accordingly dismissed. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shal1 stand closec1. However, there shall be no order as to costs. I I I so/- N. CHANDRA SEKHAR RAO ASSISTANT BEqISTRAR //// L'{h.- SECTION OFFICER One CC to Sri Viiav Kumar Punna, Advocate [OPUC] one CC to Sri J.'V Prasad, SC for Income Tax [OPUC] One CC to Ms. B. Kavitha Yadav Advocate [OPUC] Two CD Copies To, 1 2'l 4 GJ GJP ,\--