9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 256X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... That the CIT(A) was not justified in sustaining of the action of the AO in initiating the reassessment proceedings u/s 147/148 of Income Tax Act. B. That the CIT(A) overlooked the fact that ITO Ward-2 had no jurisdiction to frame the assessment. Hence the assessment had been framed without any jurisdiction of the AO and deserves to be quashed. C. That CIT(A) further failed to appreciate that no notice u/s 148 was ever served upon the assessee. Hence the total proceedings were void abinitio. D. That the CIT(A) further failed to appreciate that no notice u/s 143(2) & 142(1) were served upon the assessee. Hence the assessment framed u/s 144/147 deserves to be quashed. E. That CIT(A) has wrongly sustained the addition of Rs. 7960000/- m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he file to ITO Ward-2 Phagwara, who had the territorial jurisdiction of Phillaur Tehsil, an admitted fact by the ITO, Page.2 of her Asst. Order. The notice was never served upon on the assessee nor any verification letters were received since the assessee was NRI and living in UK. Thereafter notices u/s 142(1) & 143(2) were issued by the ITO Phagwara, Ward-2. The ITO framed the assessment by making an addition of Rs. 7960000/-as unexplained investment in property u/s 69. The order of the ITO was being challenged before in appeal before the Ld. CIT (A) who has confirmed the addition by observing vide para 5.2 of the impugned order as under: "5.2 I have gone through the assessment order passed by the AO and submissions made by the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lakh and total amount has already been received in cash. Therefore, the contention of the appellant that no consideration was actually received as the transaction was between husband and wife is found to be without any merit. The land was owned by the brother-in-law of the appellant and has been transferred to the name of the appellant. The affidavit filed by the appellant is of self serving nature and thus cannot be relied upon. The fact of having received sale consideration in cash is specifically mentioned in the sale deed and there is no reason to disregard the same. 5.5 The contention of the appellant does not hold good as the land if it was received without any consideration, the same fact should have been mentioned in the sale deed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... easons and issues a notice u/s 148 should be a Jurisdictional AO and also the competent authority to framed the assessment u/s 143/147. In support, he placed reliance on the following decisions: 1. Raghubir Singh Vs ITO Ward-3 Phagwara ITA No.599/Asr/2017 Page 1 to 7 of compilation of Judgments. 2. Gaurav Joshi Vs ITO 197 TTJ Asr 946 Page 16 to 20 of compilation of judgments 3. Jawahar Lal Aggarwal Vs ITO 119TTJ(Agra)870 Page No 10-15 of compiliation of judgments 4. Dr. Mrs. K.B. Kumar Vs ITO 131 TTJ 511 Page No.8-9 of compiliation of judgments 5. Manjit Singh Vs DCIT(Intl Taxation)207TTJ(Chd)1041 Page 21-28 of compiliation of judgments. 5. Per contra, the Ld. DR stands by the impugned order, though he has admitted the fact on ve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
