Dismissing the petition the Court held that the Assessing Officer had found that the nature of transactions mentioned in the notice which had been explained in the reply of the assessee required detailed examinations with necessary evidence in support of the assessee’s claim during the reassessment proceedings. Therefore, the notice under section 148 and the order rejecting the assessee’s objections to the reopening under section 147 need not be interfered with in exercise in writ jurisdiction (AY.2016-17)