Gujarat High Court
Rajesh Lalitkumar Soni vs The Income Tax Officer Ward 3(3)(4) on 3 December, 2019
Author: Harsha Devani
Bench: Harsha Devani, Sangeeta K. Vishen
C/SCA/21387/2019 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 21387 of 2019
==========================================================
RAJESH LALITKUMAR SONI
Versus
THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3(3)(4)
==========================================================
Appearance:
DARSHAN R PATEL(8486) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI
and
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN
Date : 03/12/2019
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI)
1. Mr. Darshan K. Patel, learned advocate for the petitioner invited the attention of the court to the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment to submit that the Assessing Officer seeks to reopen the assessment with a view to verify the large value transactions in ICICI Bank, Sarvodaya Co-operative Bank and DCB Bank wherein total amount of Rs.4,65,42,340/- was deposited in cash. It was submitted that during the course of scrutiny assessment, the Assessing Officer had called for all relevant details including the above-referred cash transactions and thereafter, framed assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act").
2. The attention of the court was invited to the statement of particulars in form 3CD to point out that the petitioner had duly mentioned the nature of the books of accounts maintained by him. It was pointed out that the Assessing Officer had issued notice under section 142(1) of the Act Page 1 of 4 Downloaded on : Wed Dec 04 01:04:19 IST 2019 C/SCA/21387/2019 ORDER calling upon the petitioner to furnish details about the nature of activities carried out by him, audit report under section 44AB of the Act, copy of sundry creditors/debtors, details of all bank account held by the petitioner with bank statement of previous year and reconciliation statement.
3. It was pointed that the Assessing Officer had by a notice dated 13th August, 2014 had called for further details about all the bank accounts held by the petitioner during the period under consideration as well as details of investments made during the year and to prove the genuineness of all unsecured loans, details of all cash deposits in different savings bank accounts including the bank account held with ICICI Bank along with proof of source thereof.
4. It was pointed out that in response thereto, the petitioner had, vide a communication dated 2nd September, 2014, inter alia furnished copy of the bank statements along with bank book and reconciliation of the banks mentioned in item number 6 thereof including DCB Bank, ICICI Bank Ltd. and Sarvodaya Commercial Co-operative Bank, in respect of which the Assessing Officer seeks to reopen the assessment.
5. It was pointed out that by a communication dated 11th September, 2014 the petitioner had made submissions before the Assessing Officer pointing out the nature of business and the fact that the profit margin in his line of business was very low. It was pointed out that the copy of the summarised ledger account of sundry debtors and confirmations of M/s. Chopra Jewelers was also enclosed therewith.
6. It was pointed out that by a communication dated 5th Page 2 of 4 Downloaded on : Wed Dec 04 01:04:19 IST 2019 C/SCA/21387/2019 ORDER December, 2014 the petitioner had furnished ledger accounts of sundry debtors along with party's confirmations, PAN and address which included Ambika Ornaments Pvt. Ltd., Utsav Jewellers and Chopra Jewellers in connection with which, the Assessing Officer seeks to reopen the assessment.
7. It was pointed out that by a further communication dated 20th February, 2015 the petitioner had furnished various other details and had also produced the cash book for verification by the Assessing Officer. It was submitted that after thorough scrutiny of the material produced by the petitioner, the Assessing Officer had framed assessment under section 143(3) of the Act as per the returned income.
8. It was submitted that therefore, the Assessing Officer now seeks to reopen the assessment on a mere change of opinion and for reappraisal of the very same material which was already place on record during the course of scrutiny assessment.
9. It was submitted that the assessment is sought to be reopened beyond a period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year without there being any failure on the part of the petitioner to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment and hence, the assumption of jurisdiction on the part of the Assessing Officer under section 147 of the Act is without authority of law. It was further pointed out that the sanction under section 151 of the Act has been granted in a mechanical manner without due application of mind.
10. Having regard to the submissions advanced by the Page 3 of 4 Downloaded on : Wed Dec 04 01:04:19 IST 2019 C/SCA/21387/2019 ORDER learned advocate for the petitioner, issue notice, returnable on 6th January, 2020. By way of ad-interim relief further proceedings pursuant to the impugned notice dated 25th March, 2019 issued by the respondent under section 148 of the Act for assessment year 2012-2013 are hereby stayed.
11. Direct service, is permitted.
(HARSHA DEVANI, J) (SANGEETA K. VISHEN,J) BINOY B PILLAI Page 4 of 4 Downloaded on : Wed Dec 04 01:04:19 IST 2019