TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 929X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rritorial jurisdiction of the AO, whereas the grievance of the assessee in the present case is regarding the issuance of the notice u/s 148. Too, undisputedly, in response to the notice u/s 148, the assessee requested his original return filed to be treated as one in response to the notice u/s 148. Thererfore, it cannot be said that no return was filed in response to the notice u/s 148. The AO, in fact, has proceeded to frame the assessment on such return only - Decided in favour of assessee - I.T.A No. 493/Agra/2015 And C.O. No. 14/Agra/2016 - - - Dated:- 16-4-2018 - SHRI A. D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Revenue : Shri Waseem Arshad, Sr.DR. For The Assessee : Shri Pankaj Garg, Adv. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erty during FY 2011-12 as per release deed/purchase deed and the so called subsequent payments thereof during FY 2013-14 through different cheques of different amounts. 5. That the CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the ITRs of the year under consideration were filed by the assessee and the sellers of the property only after when the AO initiated verification proceedings on 31.01.2013. 6. That the CIT(A) was not justified in law in overlooking the connivance of the assessee with the three sellers who are none but the cousins that he would issue three cheques aggregating to ₹ 64,80,000/- from his bank account wherein sufficient funds were not available. Had it not been the case, the assessee would have surely taken care o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y sufficient cause from filing the Crossobjection in time. Before the ld. CIT(A), the AR of the assessee had agreed not to press the legal ground, which is the grievance of the assessee by way of the Cross5 objection, in case he was to get relief on merits. It was only on legal advice that the Cross-objection was filed belately. Accordingly, the delay is condoned. 4. In the Cross-objection, the assessee contends that the ld. CIT(A) has erred in not deciding Ground Nos. 1(i) and (ii) taken before him. These grounds are as under: ( i) Because the proceedings initiated u/s 147 of the Act, issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act and consequent assessment framed u/s 143 (3) of the Act are wrong, bad in law, without jurisdiction as the reason ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /2014, fixing the date for hearing on 14/05/2014, which were sent to the assessee through speed post on the given address. As there was no compliance on the date fixed, a further notice u/s 142(1) of Income-tax, 1961 was issued on 19/05/2014 fixing the date for hearing on 26/05/2014, which was duly delivered to the assessee on 19/05/2014. On the date fixed, the assessee filed an application for adjournment for 15 days to comply the quarries of notice u/s 142(1) dated 19/05/2014, seeking reasons for re-opening of the assessment u/s 148. On request the case was adjourned for 03/06/2014. On the date fixed the assessee sought further adjournment vide written application dated (13/06/2014 which was granted for 11/06/2014. However, on the date fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lief on the mere technical ground for not providing the reasons by the AO which does not alter the fact of the case and charging of tax on the deemed income from other sources within the meaning of Section 56(2)(vii) of Income-tax Act, 1961. 7. Thus, the AO has stated that the query of the reasons was communicated to the assessee vide notice dated 16.06.2014, issued u/s 142(1) of the IT Act. He says that thus, the assessee was well acquainted with the reasons. In the last para of this letter, the AO states that not providing the assessee is with the reasons does not alter the facts of the case. As such, the AO admits that the reasons per se were not communicated to the assessee. 8. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has drawn our ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pplicable to the facts of the present case. Section 124 concerns the territorial jurisdiction of the AO, whereas the grievance of the assessee in the present case is regarding the issuance of the notice u/s 148. Too, undisputedly, in response to the notice u/s 148, the assessee requested his original return filed to be treated as one in response to the notice u/s 148. Thererfore, it cannot be said that no return was filed in response to the notice u/s 148. The AO, in fact, has proceeded to frame the assessment on such return only. 10 14. In view of the above, finding the grievance of the assessee by way of the Cross-objection to be justified, the same is accepted. Since the reasons recorded by the AO to form belief of escapement of incom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
