A reassessment order against a housewife when the alleged investment was made by her husband has been quashed by the Bombay High Court.
The bench of Justice K. R. Shriram and Justice Neela Gokhale has noted that “We also have to notice that, surprisingly, the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax has also accorded sanction for the issuance of this order instead of directing the AO to drop the proceedings against the petitioner.”
The applicant is a housewife who does not have any income and hence does not file any Income Tax Return, obtained a notice via the income tax officer u/s 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The notice shows that the officer has the details that recommend that the income leviable to tax for the AY 2016-2017 does not undergo assessment.
As per the applicant the property was purchased by her husband, Mr. Pravin Patil, and all the payments were incurred through him. The applicant has elaborated that the name of the applicant was included as a joint holder in the agreement for sale, however, no payment has been incurred via the applicant. A registered agreement copy for the property, the bank details, and other information of the husband were made available.
U/S 148A(d) of the Act the order has been passed. In the order, it mentioned that the assessing officer (AO) has investigated whether an assessment is required and the elaboration and documents furnished via the taxpayer do not conclusively preclude the recommendation based on the data available that the income leviable to tax has escaped assessment.
Related News:- Bombay HC Overturns ₹3,731 Crore GST Demand via SCN Against Employees
The grounds for passing the order are that the taxpayer does not submit the information of the source of Rs 88,75,000 paid for the purchase of property by her husband, the source, and the information of the receipt of the amount from the relatives, while the income of the husband is just Rs. 18,49,980.
The petition is been opposed by the department, however at last he acknowledged that the information needed to be asked from the husband for the assessment of the husband instead of the applicant as the AO has accepted that the applicant has not incurred any payment for the purchase of the property.
Read Also:- Bombay HC: Support Services for Business Doesn’t Come Under Taxation, No TDS Will Levy
As the order was not appropriate for the case for reopening the assessment in the case of the applicant therefore the court quashed and set aside the order passed u/s 148A(d) of the Act.
| Case Title | Kalpita Arun Lanjekar Versus Income Tax Officer |
| Case No.: | Writ Petition No. 5966 Of 2023 |
| Date | 11th March 2024 |
| Counsel For Appellant | Mr. Govind Javeri |
| Counsel For Respondent | Mr. Arjun Gupta |
| Bombay High Court | Read Order |