Whether bank account was fraudulently open in the name of assessee is question of fact

Whether bank account was fraudulently open in the name of assessee is question of fact. High Court declined to entertain Writ Petition

Whether bank account was fraudulently open in the name of assessee is question of fact.

AABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 3992 (2024) (05) HC

In the instant case, the assessee had filed a Writ Petition praying to quash the re-assessment order passed under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) on account of alleged cash deposit in the bank account in the name of the Petitioner.

The case of the Petitioner was that a current account was opened in the petitioner’s name in a bank without the knowledge of the petitioner. According to the petitioner, the alleged escaped income was deposited into the said account and that the petitioner had no connection to the cash deposited in the said bank account.

Before approaching the Hon’ble High Court, the Petitioner had also lodged a First Information Report before the Superintendent of Police.

The Petitioner submitted that he was a clerk in a factory and was drawing a meagre salary. It was submitted that the transactions that resulted in the re-assessment proceedings were on account of the involvement of the branch Manager in the said Bank.

It was further submitted that the petitioner be granted interim protection until a statutory appeal is filed.

On the contrary, the Department contended that the impugned assessment order was issued

after following the procedure in respect of re-assessment by issuing notice under Section 148A(b) order under Section 148A(d) and notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Therefore, no interference was warranted with the impugned assessment order.

The Hon’ble High Court noted that the petitioner contended that a bank account was opened in his name without his knowledge and that transactions in such account resulted in the assessment order.

The Hon’ble High Court opined that the issues/dispute raised by the Petitioner were disputed questions of fact which cannot be conveniently addressed in proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

The Hon’ble High Court further noted that as against the assessment order, a statutory appeal is available to the petitioner. Consequently, no case is made out for interference under Article 226.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition was dismissed by leaving it open to the petitioner to avail of the statutory remedy.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

• AO can’t take two different stands on immunity u/s 270AA(2) for a same transaction
• ITAT held 2000 gram jewellery reasonable in view of customary practices & CBDT Instruction
• Documents obtained post search & information obtained from public domain not incriminating material
• No second reopening for unexplained credits in bank due to bank’s name change
• FDCM invites application for empanelment of practising CAs/ Chartered Accountant Firms