SUSHIL KUMAR SHARMA Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard counsel for the parties.

(2.) The Petitioner challenges the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act. The argument advanced before us challenging the notice is on the ground that as required under Section 147 of the Act reasons have not been disclosed either in the notice or in the file. In response to the notice learned Counsel for the Revenue, Mr. Rastogi, appears and when we asked whether the reasons are noted in the file, he frankly admitted that no reasons are recorded in the file itself, apart from the notice issued to the Assessee. The notice issued to the Assessee is as follows:

(3.) Learned Counsel for the Assessee invited our attention to the Division Bench decision of this Court in the case ofShambhu Nath Sheo Prasad V/s. Commissioner of Income Tax,1993 2 PLJR 179 to which one of us was party (B.P Singh, J.), In that case under identical circumstances the Division Bench quashed the notice observing as follows: