MRS SANGEETA ARORA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 35 (1)
What did the High Court hold?
The Delhi High Court, in its oral judgment, disposed of the writ petition. The Court noted that the averments raised by the petitioner, including the misuse of her PAN and the use of an illegal bank account by Superior International and M/s Nandi Traders, are factual pleas. The Court held that the Assessing Officer (AO) is competent to determine the veracity of these pleas and examine the evidence during the assessment proceedings. The petitioner was granted liberty to raise all her pleas and contentions before the AO. The Court explicitly stated that it had not examined the merits of the controversy, and the rights and contentions of all parties were left open. The AO was directed to duly consider and adjudicate all the petitioner's pleas, including the fraud in obtaining the GST number and the bank account.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, Mrs. Sangeeta Arora, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court seeking to quash reassessment proceedings initiated by the Income Tax Officer (ITO) for Assessment Year 2018-19. The ITO received information from the Directorate of Investigation suggesting that a third party, M/s Nandi Traders, engaged in substantial sales and issued bogus Input Tax Credit (ITC) on fake bills. The information indicated that the petitioner was a beneficiary of these transactions, with alleged dealings worth Rs. 6,62,23,609/- with M/s Nandi Traders. The petitioner claims her PAN was misused to register a GST number for a firm named Superior International, with which she has no connection. She asserts she has reported this fraud to GST and police authorities, and the GST number has been cancelled. The alleged transactions are not reflected in her bank statements, and she vacated the premises used for the GST registration address in 2013.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are valid, considering the petitioner's claim that her PAN was misused and she is a victim of fraud. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argues that she has not transacted with M/s Nandi Traders and her PAN was fraudulently used to obtain a GST number for Superior International. She has reported the fraud to authorities, the GST number is cancelled, and the alleged transactions are not in her bank statements. She contends that initiating reassessment based on these fraudulent transactions will cause grave prejudice. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record specific contentions from the revenue regarding the validity of the reassessment proceedings. However, the initiation of proceedings implies the revenue's belief in the information received and the necessity of reassessment.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
W.P.(C) 14787/2022 Page 1 of 4 $~56 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 14787/2022 & CM APPLs. 45442-43/2022 MRS SANGEETA ARORA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Abhishek Dhingra, Advocate. versus INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 35 (1) ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Senior Standing Counsel for Revenue. % Date of Decision: 19th October, 2022 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA J U D G M E N T MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J (ORAL): CM APPLs. 45443/2022 (for exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions. Accordingly, the present application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) 14787/2022 & CM APPLs. 45442/2022 (for stay) 1. Present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to quash the reassessment proceedings for Assessment Year (the ‘AY’) 2018-19. 2. A perusal of the record shows that, a show cause notice under Section Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD KUMAR VATS Signing Date:27.10.2022 16:30:27 Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 14787/2022 Page 2 of 4 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (the ‘Act’) was issued to the Assessee as the Assessing Officer (‘AO’) had received information from Directorate of Investigation, Delhi. The information suggests that a perusal of the GST Return filed by a third party M/s Nandi Traders for the Financial Year (‘FY’) 2017-18 revealed that the said third party has recorded sale of Rs. 237.16 crores and purchase of Rs. 34 Lakhs, which was not shown in the Income Tax Return (‘ITR’) of the said M/s Nandi Traders. Further, the information also states that M/s Nandi Traders has issued bogus Input Tax Credit (‘ITC’) on fake sale bills and the same was forwarded to beneficiary entities. It is stated therein that the Assessee, Mrs. Sangeeta Arora, is one of the beneficiaries of the said bogus transaction and she has entered into transactions to the tune of Rs. 6,62,23,609/- with M/s Nandi Traders. 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the Assessee has not transacted with M/s Nandi Traders and her Permanent Account Number (PAN) has been misused to register the impugned GST number. He states that the Assessee has reported this fraud and lodged the complaint before the statutory authorities including the GST Officer and the police authorities. He states that the Petitioner has taken steps to report the fraud to the GST Officer and that the GST Number stands cancelled. He states that the Petitioner has also filed an application under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, (Cr. P.C.) before the competent Court and the Court has directed the concerned police station to file the Action Taken Report (ATR). He states that the Assessee believes that her PAN has been used to obtain the GST Number fraudulently and it was used under the name of Superior International, a firm with which the Petitioner has no concern. He states that the particulars of the address furnished with the GST Number is Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD KUMAR VATS Signing Date:27.10.2022 16:30:27 Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 14787/2022 Page 3 of 4 with respect to a premises which was tenanted by the Assessee many years ago and she has since vacated the said premises in 2013. 4. He further states that the proof of Assessee’s lack of involvement with the alleged M/s Nandi Traders is that the alleged transactions are not reflected in the bank statement of the Assessee. He states that the Assessee has requested the concerned police station to make enquiries with respect to the bank account used by the firm Superior International which is alleged to have transacted with M/s Nandi Traders. 5. He states that the Assessee herself is a victim of fraud and she has no concern with M/s Nandi Traders or Superior International. He states that the present reassessment proceedings initiated by the AO believing the aforesaid fraudulent transactions will cause grave prejudice to the Petitioner. 6. We have perused the documents on record. The averments raised by the Petitioner give rise to factual pleas and the AO is competent to determine the veracity of the pleas raised by the Petitioner, which include the misuse of her PAN as well as the use of an illegal bank account. 7. The Petitioner’s plea that the GST Number, which is registered at the premises in Libaspur, Delhi is not in her control or possession and the transactions under scrutiny which were undertaken by Superior International and M/s Nandi Traders were carried out in a bank account which is not operated by the Petitioner, are all factual pleas which will be determined by the AO during the assessment proceedings after examine the evidence. We are certain that during the reassessment proceedings the AO will duly consider and adjudicate all the pleas of the Petitioner, including the plea of the fraud in obtaining the GST Number and the bank account. 8. The petition is disposed of with the liberty to the Petitioner to raise all Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD KUMAR VATS Signing Date:27.10.2022 16:30:27 Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 14787/2022 Page 4 of 4 her pleas and contentions before the Assessing Officer. We make it clear that we have not examined the merits of the controversy. The rights and contentions all parties are left open. MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J MANMOHAN, J OCTOBER 19, 2022 msh Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD KUMAR VATS Signing Date:27.10.2022 16:30:27 Signature Not Verified
More judgments on Section 148A(b)
- Venkata Durga Agencies, Kakinada vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, KakinadaITA 692/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- M/S Mittal Alloy Castings Co., Raigarh vs ACIT, Circle-1(1), BilaspurITA 685/RPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Heard12 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Ashok Khubchandani, Raipur vs DCIT, Circle 1(1), RaipurITA 437/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Farman Sk, Malda vs I.T.O., Ward - 3(1), MaldaITA 3001/KOL/2025[2020-2021]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2020-2021
- Pramila Satyanarayan Bhandari, Surat vs DCIT, Circle-1(3), SuratITA 22/SRT/2026[2014-15]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Greenlam Industries LTD And Another vs. The UOI And OthersHimachal Pradesh · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S Sahoo Supply Agency,Balasore vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs,New DelhiOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S Jyoti Consultants, Agrahat vs. Pr. Commissioner GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, BhubaneswarOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S. Sahoo Supply Agency vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And CustomsOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- Gopal Aromatic PVT. LTD., Cuttack vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 3 Nov 2026