Allowed

Kanti Kaushik-Huf v. Income Tax Officer And 2 Others

Allahabad HC16 Sept 2026WTAX/762/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a writ petition challenging a show cause notice under Section 148A and an order under Section 154 for A.Y. 2017-18. The revenue conceded that the information triggering the second reassessment had already been examined in the first reassessment proceedings, which concluded on 02.03.2022. The court quashed the reassessment proceedings initiated by the notice dated 15.04.2024.

What did the court decide?

Reassessment proceedings for A.Y. 2017-18 initiated by show cause notice dated 15.04.2024 quashed.

Kanti Kaushik-Huf Vs Income Tax Officer And 2 Others — Income Tax | Allahabad HC (2026)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

WRIT TAX No. - 762 of 2024

Kanti Kaushik-Huf

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

Income Tax Officer And 2 Others

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Anjana Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: Ankur Agarwal, Gaurav Mahajan

¶9

Court No. - 39

¶10

HON'BLE SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH, J. HON'BLE SWARUPAMA CHATURVEDI, J.

¶11

Heard Mr. K.P. Singh Kaushik, Senior Advocate, assisted by Ms. Anjana Singh, learned counsel for the original petitioner/appellant and Mr. Ankur Agarwal, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the revenue.

¶12

The prayer made in the writ petition is confined to the challenge to the show cause notice dated 15.04.2024, issued under Section 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), for the A.Y. 2017-18. Also, challenge has been raised to the order dated 22.04.2024, passed under Section 154 of the Act, for A.Y. 2017-18.

¶13

Upon exchange of affidavits, it transpires, the revenue authorities have, of their own, reached satisfaction that the information giving rise to the impugned reassessment proceedings had been considered in the first reassessment proceedings initiated vide show cause notice dated 30.03.2021, which culminated in the order dated 02.03.2022. In that regard, by means of Supplementary Affidavit, it has been stated as below:

¶14

"5. That as per the information uploaded on RMS, the bank in which unexplained credits were appearing was Punjab National Bank. However, in the case of the initial reassessment proceedings in which order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was passed on 02.03.2022, the reassessment proceedings had been initiated on the basis of information of cash deposit in account maintained with Oriental Bank of Commerce.

¶15

6. That in this case, the notice in the second instance appears to have been issued due to change in the name of bank from Oriental Bank of Commerce to Punjab National Bank in

¶16

WTAX No. 762 of 2024

¶17

¶18

the information received. On verification of the details of bank accounts and facts of the case, it is revealed that the entire credit transactions for the year under consideration had been examined by the Assessing Officer during the initial reassessment proceedings. Copy of the information received is filed herewith as ANNEXURE No. SCA1 .

¶19

7. That from the above, it is apparent that the information flagged in accordance with the risk management strategy did not constitute fresh information necessitating the subsequent reopening of reassessment. Thus, the contention of the assessee in this regard seems to be acceptable."

¶20

In view of the above, the writ petition succeeds and is allowed to the extent of limited prayer made. Consequently, the reassessment proceedings for the A.Y. 2017-18 initiated by the show cause notice dated 15.04.2024, are quashed.

¶21

(Swarupama Chaturvedi,J.) (Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.)

¶22

September 17, 2026

¶23

Prakhar

¶24

Digitally signed by :- PRAKHAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kanti Kaushik-Huf v. Income Tax Officer And 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kanti Kaushik-Huf v. Income Tax Officer And 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases