{"id":31364,"date":"2022-12-16T12:51:32","date_gmt":"2022-12-16T07:21:32","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/sunil-kumar-sharma-v-dy-cit-2022-448-itr-485-karn-hc-kandaswamy-rajendran-v-dy-cit-2022448-itr-485-karn-hc\/"},"modified":"2024-03-30T12:01:38","modified_gmt":"2024-03-30T06:31:38","slug":"sunil-kumar-sharma-v-dy-cit-2022-448-itr-485-karn-hc-kandaswamy-rajendran-v-dy-cit-2022448-itr-485-karn-hc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/sunil-kumar-sharma-v-dy-cit-2022-448-itr-485-karn-hc-kandaswamy-rajendran-v-dy-cit-2022448-itr-485-karn-hc\/","title":{"rendered":"Sunil Kumar Sharma v. Dy. CIT (2022) 448 ITR 485 \/ 220 DTR 241 \/(2023) 332 CTR 72 (Karn.)(HC) Kandaswamy Rajendran v. Dy. CIT (2022)448 ITR 485\/ 220 DTR 241\/ (2023) 332 CTR 72   (Karn.)(HC)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>On writ allowing the petition the Court held that writ petition was maintainable although the assessee had an alternate remedy because the question raised involved a consideration of violation of principles of natural justice.\u00a0 That as no opportunity was provided to the assessee as required under section\u00a0127\u00a0of the Act, the transfer of case was not valid. That the action taken by the Department against the assessee based on the material contained in the diaries and loose sheets were contrary to the law. In that view the notices issued under section\u00a0153C\u00a0of the Act, based on the loose sheets and diaries were contrary to law, and set aside. (AY.2012-13 to 2018-19)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 153C : Assessment-Income of any other person-Search-Books of  account-Loose sheets and diaries do not Constitute to books of  account-Assessment based only on evidence available in loose sheets and diaries-Not valid-Transfer of  case-Assessee must be given opportunity to be heard&#8211;Existence of  alternate remedy-Not an absolute bar on issue of  Writ. [S. 132, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, S. 34, Art. 226]   <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-31364","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-89S","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/31364","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=31364"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/31364\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":40925,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/31364\/revisions\/40925"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=31364"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=31364"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=31364"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}