TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 1008X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... imited scrutiny but the Ld. Assessing officer has not discussed a word about the original reasons for selection of the case under limited scrutiny and straightway proceeded to examine the disallowance on account of exemption claimed as per the provisions u/s 54 of the Act. The ld. AO made a detailed inquiry into the claim and also discussed the plea in alternative of the assessee for allowing the benefit u/s 54F of the Act. Settled proposition of law is that the Assessing officer can widen the scope of scrutiny even when the case was selected for limited scrutiny. However, the condition precedent for such widening of the scope is that the Assessing Officer has to seek prior approval of the PCIT. Reliance in this regard can be placed on t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ber For the Assessee : Sh. C.S.Anand, CA For the Revenue : Ms. Shashi Kajle, Sr. DR ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: The appeal no ITA No.3126/Del/2019, has been preferred by the Revenue against order dated 17.01.2019 in appeal no. 10296/17-18 for the assessment year 2015-16 passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, New Delhi, in appeal pending before it against the order dated 29.12.2017 of Assessing officer, Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -56 (1), New Delhi. Assessee has also filed Cross Objection No. 136/Del/2019. 2. The facts in brief are that the assessee is an individual, who claimed he was residing for the last so many years with his family in the residential H. No. C-228, Sur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6,82,31,550/- as under :- Particulars Amount (Rs.) Total Income as per return 1,17,42,240/- Disallowance of claim made in respect of long term capital gains 5,60,56,490/- Disallowance of claim made on a/c opf cost of construction carried out in F.Y. 2012-13. 4,32,820/- 6,82,31,550/- 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has allowed the appeal on the basis that assessee is eligible for benefit of provisions of Section 54F of the Act in view of investing Rs 6 Cr. in the prescribed Capital Gains Account Scheme and on accoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the case and under the law, the claim made by the assessee under section 54 was not liable to be rejected. 5. Arguments were heard and record has been perused. As in the cross objections, the assessee has raised grounds of appeal questioning irregular exercise of jurisdiction by the Ld. AO. Arguments on the same were heard first followed by those on merits. 5.1 It was submitted on behalf of the assessee that the Ld. AO has fallen in error in passing the assessment order beyond the scope of scrutiny. Referring to para no. 2 of the assessment order it is submitted that the reason for selection of the case of assessee under limited scrutiny was first High increase in Annual Letting Value of House Property and second Large deduction ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Co-ordinate Bench in ITA no. 7496/Del/2019 where after referring to various instructions of CBDT. aforesaid proposition of law was upheld. 7. Thus, there is irregular exercise of jurisdiction by the Ld. AO in expanding the scope scrutiny. Ld. CIT(A) has fallen in error in dismissing this ground against the assessee by a sweeping observation that there was no prejudice to the assessee and it was a procedural or administrative matter. Consequentially, the ground no 1 and 2 of Cross Objection filed by assessee, going to the root of jurisdiction of the assessment order are allowed. 8. Even on merits, Ld. DR has questioned the findings of Ld CIT(A) of allowing claim of assessee on basis that it failed to consider the detailed enquiry of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
