9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 1706X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uing the notice U/s.148 was opposed to law and accordingly the assessment as made is liable to be cancelled. 2. The conditions precedent being absent, the reopening of the assessment U/s.147 is bad in law. 3. There being no omission much less an omission of declaration of income in the relevant assessment year in the return of income filed by the appellant, the reopening of the assessment U/s. 147 was without jurisdiction and consequently the reassessment is liable to be annulled. 4. The learned CIT(A) erred confirming the addition made under the head short term capital gains and making addition of Rs. 22,75,757/- in the hands of the appellant. 5. The learned CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the transaction did not belong t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the appellant to prove the genuineness of the transaction and the financial results there from besides the source of investment. 11. Without prejudice, the additions/disallowances were excessive, arbitrary and unreasonable and ought to be reduced substantially. 12. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the interest u/s. 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. 13. For these and other grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing of the appeal the appellant prays that the appeal may be allowed." 2. Through the first 3 grounds in these appeals, reopening of assessment is challenged by the assesses on the ground that there was no material information before the AO to reopen the assessment in the hands of assessee; whereas the activiti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... there was no question of reopening the assessment in the hands of AOP. 4. Having carefully examined the orders of lower authorities in the light of rival submissions, I find that undisputedly the returns were regularly filed by the individuals and nothing has been placed on record with regard to filing of returns by the AOP. During the course of hearing, the ld. counsel for the assessee has invited my attention to one return of AOP i.e., Griha Developers, appearing at page 6 of the compilation of assessee, but no evidence is filed with regard to date of filing of this return. It was stated that return was sent through registered A.D., but no evidence is placed on record. In the absence of material evidence, it is very difficult to accept ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the expenditure incurred in levelling the plot. Undisputedly the assessee has carved out 90 plots out of the total lands purchased and for its carving out, some expenditure is bound to be incurred. But the AO did not taken into account the expenditure incurred in this regard and he has computed the short term capital gain without taking into account the expenditure incurred after the purchase of plot. This approach of AO is incorrect as for developing a plot, some expenditure is bound to be incurred. Therefore, I am of the view that this issue requires readjudication by the AO and I accordingly set aside the order of CIT(Appeals) and restore the matter to the file of AO with a direction to reexamine the claim of expenditure incurred in le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
