9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 42X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the addition whereas ITA-879-2008 is regarding imposing of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. For brevity, the facts are being extracted from ITA-569-2008. 2. ITA-569-2008 has been preferred by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act") against the order dated 29.1.2008 (Annexure A-III) passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'F', New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") in ITA No. 3891/Del/2003, for the assessment year 1997-98, claiming the following substantial questions of law:- i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble ITAT was right in law in holding that the assessment framed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3)/147 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ors Limited for a sale consideration of Rs. 2,75,62,500/-. The other land belonging to the father of the assessee was acquired on 20.3.1989 by the Haryana Urban Development Authority. Due to death of his father, the assessee received total enhanced compensation of Rs. 70,75,934/- including interest of Rs. 29,69,570/- on 26.10.1996 and 16.3.1998 for the period from 20.3.1989 to 15.10.1996. Since the assessee had filed his return of income voluntarily, a notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued. In response thereto, the assessee filed his return of income on 11.3.2003 claiming his status as 'HUF'. The Assessing Officer taking the status of the assessee as 'HUF' framed the assessment under Section 143(3)/147 of the Act vi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be unsustainable. Hence, the present appeals by the revenue. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 6. The Tribunal had held that as the notices under Section 148 of the Act had been issued to the assessee in individual capacity and the reassessment under Section 143(3)/147 of the Act had been framed in the capacity of 'HUF', the assessment framed by the Assessing Officer was not in accordance with the statutory provisions of the Act and the Assessing Officer had no jurisdiction to tax the assessee, Shri Swaroop Singh- HUF. On the aforesaid premise, the Tribunal held the assessment framed under Section 143(3)/147 of the Act to be invalid and annulled the same. 7. The fact that the assessee himself had filed the return ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
