Gujarat High Court
D K Properties vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax ... on 25 November, 2025
Author: A.S. Supehia
Bench: A.S. Supehia
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/1851/2023 ORDER DATED: 25/11/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1851 of 2023
==========================================================
D K PROPERTIES
Versus
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3(1)(1),
AHMEDABAD
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR B S SOPARKAR(6851) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MRS SWATI SOPARKAR(870) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
AADITYA D BHATT(8580) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI
Date : 25/11/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)
1. Since a very short issue is involved, the matter is taken up for final
hearing.
2. Rule. Learned advocate Mr. Aaditya D. Bhatt waives service of
notice of rule on behalf of respondent no.1.
3. By way of present writ petition, the petitioner has sought for the
following reliefs:
"7(a) quash and set aside the impugned notices and order at Annexure-
A1, A2 and A3 to this petition.
(b) pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition to
stay implementation and operation of the order and notice at Annexure-
A2 and A3 to this petition and stay further proceedings for assessment for
A.Y 2018-19. "
4. The writ petition is filed for quashing and setting aside the
impugned Notice dated 09.03.2022 issued under Section 148A(b) of the
Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') as well as the order dated
07.04.2022 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act, rejecting the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/1851/2023 ORDER DATED: 25/11/2025
undefined
objections of the petitioner and the Notice dated 07.04.2022 issued under
Section 148 of the Act.
5. The facts which are established from the pleadings are such that on
15.10.2019 a search operation was conducted in case of land broker and
financial group at the premises of Shivkumar Gogia and Shivali Fashions
were searched. The documents recovered from the search shows that the
petitioner had sold six properties to one Mr. Gogia. It is alleged that since
the properties are situated in the locality of Bodakdev, the sale price was
too low. It is further alleged that in a similar search under Section 132 of
the Act, conducted at the place of one Mr. V.K Manghrani and from his
mobile phone a chat was recovered between Mr. Maghrani and a broker
Mr. Chirag Desai, wherein Mr.Desai had quoted rate of the property in
"Stellar" project from Rs.18,000/- to Rs.20,000/- per sq.ft. Thus, on the
basis of the said material the Assessing Officer has concluded that the
petitioner had sold six shops to Mr. Gogia which would also be of
Rs.18,000/- per sq.ft.
6. Learned advocate Mr. B.S Soparkar for the petitioner while placing
reliance on the judgment and order of this Court dated 16.09.2025 passed
in Special Civil Application No. 210 of 2024 and allied matters has
submitted that the impugned Notices are required to be quashed and set
aside. It is contended that there is no live nexus between the material
which has been recovered from one Mr.V.K. Mangrani with the present
petitioner, nor with the broker Mr. Chirag Desai, between whom the chat
had undertaken wherein, the price of the properties in question had been
quoted. It is thus urged that the respondent- Officers have acted illegally
and has issued impugned Notices alleging that there is an escape of
income on the basis of the chat between Mr. Magrani and his broker
Mr.Desai.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/1851/2023 ORDER DATED: 25/11/2025
undefined
7. Per Contra, learned advocate Mr. Bhatt while placing reliance on
the affidavit-in-reply filed by the respondent Officer has submitted that
the writ petition may not be entertained as during the search under
Section 132 of the Act, which has been carried out at the premises of
Mr.Maghrani who is closely associated with Mr. Shivkumar Gogia, it was
found that the petitioner had direct nexus with Mr. Gogia and his family
members as the petitioner had sold six shops in the Stellar project during
the said assessment year 2018-19. While placing reliance on the judgment
of Bombay High Court, in case of Nickunj Eximp Enterprises (P.) Ltd.
Vs. ACIT [2014] 48 taxmann.com 20 (Bombay). It is submitted that at
this stage, only the notices have been issued and the Assessing Officer
has only to examine whether on the basis of the material available, a
reasonable person could form a reasonable view to believe that income
chargeable to tax has escaped assessment or not. Thus, it is urged that the
writ petition may not be entertained.
8. We have heard the learned advocates for the respective parties and
have also perused the materials available on record. The facts, which are
recorded hereinabove are not in dispute. The impugned Notices as
mentioned above emanates from the search carried out under Section 132
of the Act at the premises of one Mr. Gogia and Mr.Maghrani. The
Assessing Officer has fixed the price of the shops at the rate of
Rs.18,000/- to Rs.20,000/- per sq.ft, on the basis of the mobile images
recovered from Mr. Maghrani, who had received the text message from
his broker Mr. Chirag Desai, who in turn had quoted the rate of Stellar
property ranged between Rs.18,000/- to Rs.20,000/-.
9. The petitioner made a detailed objection on 15.03.2022 to the
Notice issued under Section 148A(B) of the Act. However, the
respondents rejected such objections only on the ground that the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/1851/2023 ORDER DATED: 25/11/2025
undefined
Assessing Officer had given enough proof by quoting the price of
Rs.18,000/- to Rs.20,000/- per sq.ft, on the basis of the chat between one
Mr.Maghrani and his broker Mr. Chirag Desai. Thus, unquestionably the
materials on record and the impugned order dated 07.04.2022 rejecting
the objections of the petitioners clearly manifests that the nexus between
Mr.Magrani and his broker Mr. Chirag Desai has been used against the
petitioner by taking a detour and roping him on the pretext that since the
broker Mr.Desai had quoted the price of the shops in the "Stellar" project
ranging between Rs.18,000/- to Rs.20,000/- per sq.ft to Mr. Maghrani.
Hence, the income for the Assessment Year 2018-19 has been escaped by
the petitioner for the assessment. In fact, there is no live nexus worth a
name between the petitioner and one Mr. Magrani or with the broker
Mr.Desai. Therefore, the entire exercise undertaken by the respondent -
Assessing Officer is vague and is premised on presumptions and
assumptions.
10. In view of the aforesaid, the writ petition succeeds and the same
stands allowed. Accordingly, the impugned Notice dated 09.03.2022
issued under Section 148A(b) of the Act, the order dated 07.04.2022
passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act, and the consequential Notice
dated 07.04.2022 issued under Section 148 of the Act, are hereby quashed
and set aside. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. No order as
to costs.
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J)
(PRANAV TRIVEDI,J)
Radhika / 31
