TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 598X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The right course under the law should have been that the assessee's case, should have been reopened and notice u/s. 148, should have been issued in the name of Shri Harneet Singh Chandhoke and if there is any undisclosed income belonging to the minor, then same ought to have been taxed in the hands of the assessee. Thus, the assessment order passed u/s. 147/143 (3) which has been framed on the basis of notice issued in the name of minor daughter, Ms. Jyotika Chandhoke and a different PAN cannot validate the proceedings. Hence, the same is quashed as void ab initio. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. - I.T.A. No. 3642/DEL/2016 - - - Dated:- 30-7-2021 - Amit Shukla, Member (J) And Prashant Maharishi, Member (A) For the Appellant : Saksham Singhal, Adv. For the Respondents : Avikal Manu, Sr. D.R. ORDER Per Amit Shukla , JM The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against the impugned order dated 31.03.2016, passed by ld. CIT(A)-XII, New Delhi for the quantum of assessment passed u/s.143(3)/147 for the Assessment Year 2006-07. The assessee has challenged the validity of proceedings u/s. 147 and notice u/s. 148 on various ground ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e name of Ms. Jyotika Chandhoke for ground floor (Commercial) in Indirapuram Habitat Centre Project, Ghaziabad for a total consideration of ₹ 33,43,560/-, out of which a sum of ₹ 13,50,000/- were paid through banking channel, which is admitted fact by the assessee and ₹ 1993560/- in cash, which has been denied by the assessee. Balance amount of Rs. One lac was payable through cheque. The Investigation Wing, New Delhi analyzed the details seized during search operation and found that Ms. Jyotika Chandhoke was having PAN AHMPC7976L which was in the jurisdiction of Ward-T(3), New Delhi. In view of these facts the Investigation Wing sent information to the AO of Ward-1(3), New Delhi. After receiving such information the AO, Ward-1(3), New Delhi found that no ITR has been filed on the said PAN. Keeping in view all facts the AO had reason to believe that transactions had escaped the tax and accordingly he issued notice on 30/03/2013 u/s.148 of the I.T. Act, 1961 by speed post which was duly served upon Ms. Jyotika Chandhoke. In response to notice/reply was received vide letter dt. 05/04/2013 giving information and copy of ITR of Sh. Harneet Singh Chandhok ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... otice u/s.148 issued on 30.03.2013 is valid. 4. The department was requested through new PAN application to allot PAN to his minor daughter under the direction/guidance of Sh. Harneet Singh Chandhoke and the same has been used while investing money in the property in her name. In this manner it appears that the assessee had concealed the facts and misled the department. 5. As per provisions of section 120 of the I.T. Act, 1961 objection in respect pi jurisdiction could be made within 30 days of receipt of notice whereas in the case of the assessee objections were raised after 30 days which is not sustainable in the eyes of law. 6. Accordingly, Assessing Officer proceeded to frame the assessment in the case of the assessee and thereby making the addition of ₹ 90,93,560/- u/s. 69 holding that same has been made in cash. 7. Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the said action of the Assessing Officer and held that in view of the provision of Section 292B, the notice is deemed to be valid. The relevant observation reads as under: 9.4 I have carefully considered the observations of the Assessing Officer, submissions of the Appellant and case laws relied on by him. Appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... notice u/s. 148 was issued within the limitation period. Appellant had challenged the validity of notice u/s. 148 on 20.05.2013. Assessing Officer has disposed off the objection of reopening vide order dated 26.12.2013. She held that challenge to jurisdiction was not made within 30 days of receipt of notice and, therefore, objection to jurisdiction was not maintainable. Appellant has not anything stated on the finding of Assessing Officer. It is seen that Appellant claims to have made booking in his name whereas all the payments have been made from the bank account of his daughter. Further, it is seen that though Appellant was clubbing the income of his daughter in his return of income, he had taken separate PAN in the name of her daughter and has used the same while making investment from bank account of his daughter. Therefore, it is seen that Appellant has not disclosed the entire facts in his ITR filed. Further, from perusal of the seized material, it is seen that Appellant had booked a space in the ground floor commercial of 500 sq. ft. for which payment has been made in both cash and cheque. The payment by cheque is ₹ 13,50,000/- whereas payment in cash ie ₹ 19,9 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt and one in the name of his minor daughter, Assessing Officer had committed the mistake in issuing the notice in the name of Miss Jyotika Chandoke which is on account of two PANs taken by Appellant one in his own name and one in the name of his minor daughter Miss Jyotika Chandoke. Further, it may be stated that while verifying the jurisdiction of any Assessee from PAN Database of Department Website incometaxindiaefiling.gov.in, there is no mention of Date of Birth of Assessee. As a result, the Assessing Officer will not know the fact that an Assessee is a minor beforehand and, therefore, issue of notice in substance and effect is in conformity with the intent and purpose of the Income Tax Act. Therefore, Grounds No. 2 to 9 are dismissed. 8. After considering the rival submissions and on perusal of the material placed on record, we find that it is an undisputed fact that the notice has been issued in the name of Ms. Jyotika Chandhoke daughter of Shri Harneet Singh Chandhoke and even in the reasons recorded, the reason to believe for income escaping assessment has been entertained in the case of Ms. Jyotika Chandhoke only. Even the PAN mentioned in the reasons recorded is diff ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
