a.m., though the document which was served to him contended a date of March 28, 2023. The document did not enclose any other material upon which the imputation was based. Furthermore, the writ petitioner was provided time until April 18, 2023 to submit a reply to the said show cause notice. Again, the reply submitted by the writ petitioner has not been considered by the respondent authorities and a notice under Section 148 of the said Act has been issued by them. The facts of the present case clearly go to show that the mandatory provisions under Section 148A of the Income Tax Act have not been followed by the respondent authorities in the present case. Firstly, the minimum span of time to be allowed to reply to the show cause notice, of seven days, cannot be said to have been allowed to the writ petitioner in view of the fact that he was served with the show cause notice only on April 13, 2023 while he was required to reply to the same before or on April 18, 2023 i.e. much less a time period of minimum seven days, as provided under the law. Secondly, the writ petitioner has not been provided with the relevant documents upon which the imputations against him are founded. Further, it can be seen that the respondent authorities have purportedly issued an order under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, without considering writ petitioner’s objections to the said show cause notice. This is also untenable under the law.
