KOYAMBRATH PUTHIYAPURAYIL MOHAMMED KUNHI Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr S Arun Raj learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr Christopher Abraham learned Standing Counsel for the Department.

(2.) The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner for quashing Ext.P1 notice under Sec. 148A(b), consequential Ext.P2 order passed under Sec. 148A(d), and issuance of Ext.P3 notice under Sec. 148 of the Income Tax Act 1961 (for short, 'IT Act') issued by the 1st respondent.

(3.) The petitioner is a Non-Resident Indian working in Oman. The 1st respondent issued notice dtd. 19/3/2022 to the petitioner under Sec. 148A(b) of the IT Act for the Assessment Year 2018-19 informing the petitioner that the income of the petitioner chargeable to tax for the Assessment Year 2018-19 has escaped assessment for the reasons that the petitioner had purchased immovable properties worth Rs.1.00 crore, Rs.70.00 lakhs, Rs.2.00 crore and also purchased a vehicle for Rs.69.00 lakhs. The petitioner had not filed returns of his income. Therefore, sources of cash utilised for purchasing the immovable properties and vehicles remained unexplained.