Allowing the petition the Court held  that  this was a case where more than three years had elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year. In that case, in order to initiate proceeding under sections 148 of the Act, it was not only required to be shown that some income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment, but also that it amounted to or was likely to amount to Rs. 50 lakhs or more than for that year. The material available on record did not show any cash deposits more than what was asserted by the assessee, which was far less than the amount as stated in the notice under section 148A(d) of the Act. However, the officer had proceeded to hold that there may be one or more accounts in the Corporation Bank in his name or permanent account number. It was on this surmise, bereft of any material on record that the authority seemed to justify its action and order dated March 29, 2022. The material available on record before the authority did not disclose any cash deposit or any other transactions which could be said to have escaped assessment, which was more than Rs. 50 lakhs. The order and proceedings were unsustainable in law. (AY.2015-16)