Benaifer Vispi Patel v. ITO (2024) 340 CTR 581 / 241 DTR 209 / 300 Taxman 248 (Bom)(HC)

S. 148A: Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Interest income-Any information-It is incumbent on the AO to apply his mind to all such materials-Any information which is derived from S. 135A would be sacrosanct and/or would be free of defects-Interest income received from the bank-Notice issued is arbitrary and vitiated by non application of mind hence quashed. [S. 135A,143(1), 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 14,19(1)(g), 226, 265, 300A]

The assessee, an individual, filed her return of income for the relevant assessment year. An intimation was issued to the assessee under section 143(1) without any addition, accepting the total income disclosed by the assessee in her return of income. Thereafter, information was received from the Insight Portal, intimating that there were discrepancies with regard to the interest income set out in the return filed for the relevant assessment year. The assessee claimed that the information received from the portal was incorrect.The Assessing Officer issued notice under section 148 and dispensed with applicability of section 148A on ground that he was in receipt of information with respect to discrepancies in interest income as per scheme notified under section 135A, which provided for faceless collection of information. On writ the Court held that   it cannot be conceived that at all material times, the information available in the electronic mechanism/system, would be free from errors and defects.Once a defect was pointed out on information as available on portal, it would be duty of Assessing Officer to examine version of assessee in pointing out that information was not correct and same would require due consideration for any further action to be taken to issue notice under section 148.  When electronic information was available under faceless mechanism and there was other material available, as may be gathered by Assessing Officer or furnished by assessee, it would be incumbent on Assessing Officer to apply his mind to all such materials and only thereafter take a well considered view of matter to issue a notice under section 148 by dispensing provisions of section 148A.Court held that reopening notice was arbitrary and vitiated by non-application of mind and  is set aside.   (AY.  2020-21)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*