Bombay High Court
Ramchand Murlidhar Raimalani vs Income Tax Officer on 13 December, 2018
Author: M.S.Sanklecha
Bench: Akil Kureshi, M.S.Sanklecha
Priya Soparkar 1 24 wp 3293-18-o
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.3293 OF 2018
Ramchand Murlidhar Raimalani ... Petitioner
V/s.
Income Tax Officer ... Respondent
---
Mr.Ketan H. Shah for the Petitioner.
Mr.A.R.Malhotra with Mr. N.A.Kazi for the Respondent.
---
CORAM : AKIL KURESHI AND
M.S.SANKLECHA, JJ.
DATE : DECEMBER 13, 2018.
P.C.:-
1. Petitioner has challenged a notice of re-opening of issue which is in issue beyond the period of four years from the end of relevant assessment year. Drawing our attention to the reasons recorded by the Assesssing Officer for issuing the notice, counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had not transacted any business through Kartika Investment, a share broker who is alleged to have misused the Client Code Modification facility. He submitted that this was pointed out to the Assessing Officer in the ::: Uploaded on - 15/12/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 27/12/2018 06:44:40 ::: Priya Soparkar 2 24 wp 3293-18-o objections raised by the petitioner. While disposing the objections however, he has not dealt with this issue.
2. Learned counsel Shri Malhotra prayed for time to file reply.
3. Stand over to 17th January, 2019.
4. By way of ad-interim relief, assessment pursuant to impugned notice is stayed.
(M.S.SANKLECHA,J.) (AKIL KURESHI,J.) ....
::: Uploaded on - 15/12/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 27/12/2018 06:44:40 :::