Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (12) TMI 466 - ITAT AHMEDABADValidity of notice u/s 143(2) – Assessee contended that return was filed on 31.07.2007 and notice u/s 143(2) was issued on 16.09.2008, therefore, it was not within the period prescribed under the Act – Held that:- Following the decision in Amarjit Singh Tut. Versus Union of India [2013 (2) TMI 173 - Punjab and Haryana High Court] - the return was furnished on 31st July, 2007, therefore, the financial year had ended on 31st March, 2008 - The sixth month from the end of the financial year was expiring on 31st September, 2008 - However, the notice was served u/s. 143(2) on 16.09.2008, therefore the notice was very much within the time prescribed - The old provisions were not applicable wherein it was prescribed that no notice u/s.143(2) shall be served on the assessee after the expiry of 12 months from the end of the month in which the return was furnished - since a procedure has been laid down which was effective from 1st April, 2008, therefore it is expected from the Revenue Department to follow the procedure, especially the issuance of notice u/s 143(2) of IT Act - Since, the AO has rightly followed the procedure by issuing a notice u/s.143(2) within the time prescribed under the proviso to Section 143(2), there is no substance in this additional ground of the assesse – Decided against the assesse. Computation of LTCG on sale on land – Transfer u/s 2(47) – Held that:- Revenue rightly contended that because as per Section 2(47) the definition of the word "transfer” in relation to a capital asset includes sale, exchange, and relinquishment of the asset. This is a case of a transfer of an immovable property - since the possession was handed over and the sale deed was registered in the Financial Year 2006-07, therefore, the correct assessment year ought to be A.Y.2007-08. The AO’s action, in this regard is hereby affirmed. - Decided against the assessee. Application of section 50C - valuation on the basis of the rates of stamp duty fixed by the sub-registrar. - Held that:- on one hand, the assessee has claimed that only 50% of the land was transacted but the stamp duty was paid on the entire area of the land, but on the other hand, the AO’s opinion was that the sale consideration in respect of entire land was to be assessed in the hands of the assessee by applying the stamp duty rates which were paid by the assessee at the time of execution of the sale deed. – matter is remitted back to the AO for fresh adjudication – Decided partly in favour of assesse.
|