9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (9) TMI 1534X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (3), Noida issued a letter requiring to verify the financial transaction. However, no plausible explanation was furnished by the assessee. As per information provided by Sub Registrar the assessee had sold Plot no. 230, Block-B, Sector- 71, Noida for Rs. 75,21,000/-, value for stamp purposes Rs. 78,51,000/- on 06.03.2010. The AO initiated reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act to assess the income of the assessee in this regard which escaped assessment. The assessee filed a letter stating therein that return filed originally may be treated as return filed in response to notice u/s 148 of the Act. The AO noted that on change of incumbent the proceedings have been continued from the stage as per section 129 of the Act. The AO completed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... basis of information in my possession, I have reason to believe that the income under head capital gain arises on of Rs. 78,51,000/- chargeable to tax has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961." Dated: 10.03.2017 Sd/- (R.K. SHARMA) Income Tax Officer, ITO, Ward 2(3), Noida 4. He has submitted that these reasons are recorded by ITO, Ward 2(3), Noida and thereafter, he has written a letter dated 07.09.2017 PB 10 to the Assessing Officer (ITO, Ward 2(1), Faridabad) stating therein that the notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 30.03.2017. As per acknowledgement of return for assessment year submitted by the assessee on 07.09.2017, assessee comes under the jurisdiction of ITO, Ward 2(1), Farida ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dabad. Ld. DR produced the assessment record and submitted that no separate reasons u/s 148 have been recorded by ITO, Ward 2(1), Faridabad. Ld. DR, however, submitted that AO was having jurisdiction to proceed with the matter on transfer of the case from ITO, Noida. 6. I have considered the rival submissions. It is not in dispute that reasons for reopening of the assessment have been recorded in this case by ITO, Ward 2(3), Noida, who was having no jurisdiction over the case of the assessee. When assessee filed letter before ITO, Ward 2(3), Noida on 07.09.2017 stating therein that return filed originally may be treated as return having filed in response to notice u/s 148 of the Act and is also supported by copy of acknowledgment of return ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the same person. Successor AO cannot issue notice u/s 148 on the basis of reasons recorded by predecessor AO. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court held as under: "Held, (i) that so far as the assessment years 1990-91 and 1991-92 were concerned, the officer who had issued the notice under section 148 of the Act, was different from the officer who had recorded the reasons and hence, the notices for both these years were invalid and deserved to be quashed on this ground alone." 7. In view of the above discussion, I am of the view that the assumption of jurisdiction u/s 147/148 of the Act is illegal and bad in law and, as such, liable to be quashed. I, accordingly, set aside the orders of the authorities below and quash the reopening of the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
