9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 246X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" for brevity) and to quash the consequential proceedings, dated 22.12.2017, as being without jurisdiction and illegal. 3.The assessee is an individual and for the Assessment Year under consideration, AY 2010-11, he had filed return of income on 30.07.2010 declaring a total income of Rs. 4,46,870/-. The return was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act on 08.04.2011 and subsequently, the assessment was taken up for scrutiny and notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued and the Assessing Officer called for details. The details were furnished by the assessee and one of the details called for was in respect of the property which was sold by the assessee during the Financial Year 2009- 10 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssing Officer opined that he has reasons to believe that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. The assessee submitted his reply, dated 21.10.2017, pointing out as to how the Assessing Officer has sought to reopen the assessment after it was completed under Section 143(3) of the Act and also having taken note of the facts that the assessee had in his return of income filed for AY 2004-05 had disclosed the transaction and the details of the long term capital gains were furnished and intimation was issued under Section 143(1) for AY 2004-05 vide notice dated 01.07.2005, in response to which, the assessee had submitted the proof of having deposited the capital gains as envisaged under Sub-Section 2 of Section 54 of the Act in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llant/assessee in the year 2003 and admittedly, the Power Agent sold the property only during the Assessment Year under consideration and therefore, the assessee should raise all grounds before the Assessing Officer and avail the remedies under the provisions of the Act. 6.In our considered view, moot question which was required to be decided in the writ petition was whether the reopening of the assessment was valid and whether it is a case of change of opinion. For such an exercise, the only issue to be considered was whether there was a transfer of the immovable property during the previous year relevant to AY 2004-05 or did the transfer take place at the behest of the appellant/assessee in the Assessment Year 2010-11. 7.Therefore, to d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reopening. In our considered view, the assessee has been put to sheer harassment on account of notice under Section 148 of the Act, dated 31.03.2017. Had the Assessing Officer perused the letter of the Assessing Officer dated 26.07.2005, wherein, the details were sought for with regard to the deposit of capital gains, the information furnished by the assessee through his Chartered Accountant on 08.08.2005, the certificate issued by the Indian Bank, North Usman Road Branch, Chennai, dated 07.08.2005, and the order of assessment under Section 143(3) dated 30.10.2008, the present reopening would not have been made and could not have been made. Therefore, we are convinced that the reopening is a clear case of change of opinion and therefore, no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
