2025 (4) TMI 1632 - SCH - Income Tax

Validity of reopening of assessment - allegation of violation of the provisions of section 50C of the Income Tax Act 1961 and due to noncompliance assessee also failed to explain the transaction - as decided by HC 2024 (1) TMI 1009 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT As petitioner states and rightly so that provisions of Section 50C of the Act would apply only to a seller and not the assessee in this case who is the buyer of the property. There is nothing in the notice to explain as to how if the transaction amount is less than the stamp duty value there can be escapement of any income particularly in the hands of a buyer. Sanction should have also applied his mind and satisfied himself that the order passed u/s148A(d) of the Act was being issued correctly by applying mind and cannot be a mechanical sanction. HELD THAT - There is a gross delay of 331 days in filing the Special Leave Petition which has not been satisfactorily explained by the petitioners. Special Leave Petition is accordingly dismissed on the ground of delay. Pending applications if any shall also stand disposed of.

Summary

The Supreme Court, through Justices J. B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, dismissed the Special Leave Petition due to a "gross delay of 331 days" in filing, which was "not satisfactorily explained by the petitioners." The Court held that the petition must be dismissed "on the ground of delay," and all pending applications were also disposed of.