TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 333X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ill not apply. The first condition that there should be a reason for believing escapement of income is necessary ingredient. A reading of the reasons reproduced by us above do not indicate how there could have been escapement of income in assessee’s hand where the property was settled in favour of the assessee by her husband, income from which was assessable in the hands of her husband. In my opinion, therefore the reasons cited for reopening the assessment had no legs to stand and smack of total non-application of mind. Exconsequenti the reassessments done for the impugned assessment years are set aside.- Decided in favour of assessee. - I.T.A. Nos. 434, 435, 436, 437 & 438/Mds/2017 - - - Dated:- 26-4-2017 - Shri Abraham P. George, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0 sq.ft. in Nos. 97 98, R.K. Mutt Road, Mandaveli, Chennai -28 was settled in favour of the assessee. Contention of the ld. Authorised Representative was that by virtue of Section 27(i) of the Act, income from property transferred to a spouse, otherwise than for adequate consideration, was to be considered only in the hands of the transferor. As per ld. Authorised Representative the reasons cited for reopening the assessments for the impugned assessment years had no legs to stand and could not be considered as a reason at all, since there was no escapement of income in the hands of the assessee, on account of the property settled by the assessee s husband in her favour. In any case as per ld. Authorised Representative annual value fixed b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ancial year relevant to the Assessment Year 2006-01; the assessee has received An undivided 630 sq.ft. of land right together with the fully constructed the basement floor measuring about 1700 sq.ft: or thereabouts and the shop in the ground floor having a carpet area of 150 sq.ft./ or thereabouts/ situated in Nos.97 98, R.K.Mutt Road, .Mandaveli Chennai- 600028 from her husband through Settlement Deed. The settlement Deed was Registered In SRO/ Mylapore vide Document No.3252/2005 dated 25.11.2005. The assessee has not admitted the rental income from out of the above property in her Return of Income. The value of the rent receivable by assessee for the above property during the Assessment Year 2006-07 would be 1,61,875/- ( 1850 s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deemed to be the owner of the house property so transferred . By application of the above section, it is clear that the owner of the property, which was settled in favour of the assessee was assessee s husband for the purpose of assessing the income under the head income from house property . Thus income derived from the subject property was assessable only in the hands of the assessee s husband. It is true that original assessments for all the impugned assessment year except for assessment year 2010-2011 were completed u/s.143(1) of the Act. It is also true that for assessment year 2010- 2011, assessee had not filed a return at all within the time limit allowed u/s.139 of the Act. What has been held by the Hon ble Apex Court in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... med a requisite belief. Whether the materials would conclusively prove the escapement is not the concern at that stage. This is so because the formation of belief by the Assessing Officer is within the realm of subjective satisfaction (see ITO v. Selected Dalurband Coal Co. P. Ltd. [1996] 217 ITR 597 (SC) ; Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO [1999] 236 ITR 34 (SC). 17. The scope and effect of section 147 as substituted with effect from April 1, 1989, as also sections 148 to 152 are substantially different from the provisions as they stood prior to such substitution. Under the old provisions of section 147, separate clauses (a) and (b) laid down the circumstances under which income escaping assessment for the past assessment years could ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (1) of the Act and where an original assessment was not done at all, the condition regarding omission or failure of the assessee and /or condition regarding change of opinion will not apply. However, the first condition that there should be a reason for believing escapement of income is necessary ingredient. A reading of the reasons reproduced by us above do not indicate how there could have been escapement of income in assessee s hand where the property was settled in favour of the assessee by her husband, income from which was assessable in the hands of her husband. In my opinion, therefore the reasons cited for reopening the assessment had no legs to stand and smack of total non-application of mind. Exconsequenti the reassessments done f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
