Allowing the petition the court held that that there was no deliberate concealment of facts by the assessee. If the assessee had intended to defraud the Department he would not have declared the imports in the books of account as proprietor of the concern. The order under section 148A(d) and notice under section 148 passed and issued against the non-extant erstwhile firm were unsustainable and therefore, set aside. The Department would be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law. (AY.2016-17)
Rajinder Nath Kapoor v. ITO (2023)457 ITR 225 /294 Taxman 576 (Delhi)(HC)
S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Return filed under new Permanent Account Number as a sole proprietor-Notice issued in name of erstwhile firm-Notice and order is quashed.[S. 148, 148A(b). 148A(d), Art. 226]