On writ allowing the petition, the Court held that the assessee had furnished details pertaining to capital gains including the short-term capital gains on sale of shares along with documentary evidence in support of the sale in the scrutiny assessment under section 143(3). In the reasons, it was stated that during the year under consideration the assessee had made high value suspicious banking transactions. In the entire recording of reasons, the Assessing Officer had not revealed the mature of the transaction, date of the transaction and the name of the party with whom such transaction had been entered into. The reasons recorded were cryptic and scanty and hence the notice issued was not valid.(AY. 2017-18)