TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 256X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o records the reasons and issues a notice u/s 148 should be a Jurisdictional AO and secondly the assessment also has to be framed by the same AO who initiated the proceedings u/s 147, 148. In our view, the assessment order passed by the ITO, Ward-2, Phagwara is without jurisdiction and the same is not in accordance with law, hence required to be quashed. The finding of the Ld. CIT(A) on the issue of jurisdiction and thereby confirming the assessment order are unwarranted and perverse and such a finding against the settled position of law can not be approved. We accept the grievance of the assessee genuine. We hereby quash the assessment order and the impugned order of the CIT(A) for the aforesaid reasons. The consequential penalty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TO u/s 69/69A and while sustaining he failed to appreciate the submissions filed by the assessee. F. The order of CIT(A) ITO are against the law and facts of the case. In ITA No. 140/Asr/2019, the assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal: A. That the CIT(A) was not justified in sustaining the penalty of ₹ 2597970/- levied by the ITO u/s 271(1)(c). B. That the CIT(A) has not granted proper opportunity while passing the order which is against the natural justice and therefore the order of CIT(A) cannot be sustained. C. That CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the penalty was levied by AO without giving proper opportunity and notice to the assessee and penalty deserved to be quashed. D. That both AO CIT(A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant and find that an addition of ₹ 79,60,000 on account of unexplained investment in immoveable property u/s 69/69A of the IT Act has been made by the AO. The assessment proceedings were initiated by the AO u/s 147 of the IT Act based on the information available on record with regard to investment of ₹ 79,60,000 made by the appellant for purchase of agricultural land measuring 48 kanals in Vill. GannaPind, Tehsil Phillaur from Sh. Pavittar Singh S/o Sh. Sarwan Singh, attorney holder of Sh. Bhajan Singh. During the course of assessment proceedings, no compliance was made by the appellant and in the absence of any evidence with regard to the sources of investment, the total amount of investment was treated as income from u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entioned in the sale deed itself and stamp duty is payable even in such cases as per the circle rate of the property to be transferred. There is no bar under any legal provision for registration of transfer of property stating that the same has been received as a gift without any consideration. Thus, there is no reason to disbelieve what has already been stated in the legal document. Therefore, I hold that appellant has not been able to substantiate the sources of investment made for purchase of property. Accordingly, addition of ₹ 79,60,000 made by the AO on account of unexplained investment is confirmed. 4. The Ld. Counsel Sh. Y. K. Sood for the assessee submitted that the CIT(A) completely ignored the settled legal position wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der, though he has admitted the fact on verification of assessment records that undisputedly the ITO Ward-4 Phagwara who had no Jurisdiction over the case recorded the reasons and issued the notice u/s 148 and thereafter transferred the file to the Jurisdictional ITO i.e. Ward-2 Phagwara who framed the assessment. 6. Having heard rival contentions, perusing the relevant documents, assessment record and case law cited, it is admitted fact that ITO Ward-4 Phagwara, had no Jurisdiction over the case who has recorded the reasons and issued the notice u/s 148 and thereafter transferred the file to the Jurisdictional ITO i.e. Ward-2 Phagwara who in turn framed the assessment. The issue of jurisdiction in this regard is now settled law by ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
