The petitioner challenged the notice issued u/s. 148 of the Act, on the ground that there was not even a whisper as to what was the tangible material in the hands of the AO which made him to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped the assessment and what was the material fact that was not fully and truly disclosed. Allowing the petition the Court held that in the reasons for reopening the AO does not even disclose when the search and survey action 132 was carried out. The reasons for reopening are absolutely silent as to how the search and survey action on M/s Evergreen Enterprises or the statement referred to or relied upon in the reasons have any connection with the petitioner. The reassessment notice was quashed and set aside. (AY. 2011-12)
Peninsula Land Ltd. v. ACIT (2021) 439 ITR 582 / (2022) 134 taxmann.com 33 / 284 Taxman 556 (Bom.)(HC)
S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Recorded reasons must indicate the manner in which the Assessing Officer has come to the conclusion that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment-Reason recorded cannot be substituted-Reassessment Notice was quashed. [S. 148, Art. 226]