TMI Blog2024 (4) TMI 802X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been clarified by CBDT explaining the judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Agarwal [ 2022 (5) TMI 240 - SUPREME COURT] implementation of by lower authorities and accepted the position that notices cannot be issued for assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16, wherever income escaping assessment in that year, amounts to or is likely to amount to less than fifty lakh rupees. In the present case before us, the amount is Rs. 29,20,000/-. This issue is squarely covered by the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in Ashish Agarwal, supra, in favour of assessee and subsequently, issued instruction by CBDT and hence, we quash the notice issued u/s. 148 of the Act dated 13.04.2021 or 19.03.2021 as without jurisdiction. - Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice President And Shri S.R. Raghunatha, Accountant Member For the Appellant : Shri N. Arjun Raj, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT ORDER PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT: This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the final assessment order passed in pursuant to the directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel-2, Bengaluru dated 14.12.2022 by the Income Tax Officer, International Taxation Ward 1(1), Chennai for the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as per guideline value provided in TNREGINET as per Section 50C of the Act. Hence, accordingly he added additional income on account of capital gains u/s. 50C of the Act to the extent of Rs. 29.20 lakhs. Aggrieved against draft assessment order, assessee moved to Dispute Resolution Panel. The assessee raised objection before DRP for issuance of notice u/s. 148 of the Act and DRP vide order dated 14.12.2022 upheld the action of the AO in reopening of assessment u/s. 147 of the Act and approved the draft order of AO. For this, the DRP recorded as under:- 2.0 Grounds of Objection No.1: The Assessing Officer has grossly erred in Issuing the notice us 148 of the Income Tax Act 1961 dated I3-04-2021 bearing DIN ITBA/AST/S/148/2020-21/1031619292 (2) for the assessment year 2013-14 as it does not comply with the provisions, procedures and limitations prescribed under sections 147,148, 148A and 149 of the Income Tax Act of 1 961. 2.1 Panel: Having considered and perused the submissions of the assessee, the panel is of the considered opinion that the notice issued u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was issued within the stipulated time limits as laid down u/s 149(1)(b) of the Income Tax A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come Tax Act, for a sum Rs. 29,20,000/-. Therefore, for the year under consideration, the assessee had undervalued his inform from long term capital gains out of the above said transactions and provisions of clause (c) of explanation 2 to sec.147 are applicable to facts of this case and a notice u/s. 148 was issued on 19-03-2021 requiring the assessee to file the return in response to section 148. The notice was duly complied and a return was submitted on 05-05-2021. However no additional income was offered. In view of the above, the ld.counsel stated that the assessee s case i.e., issuance of notice either on 19.03.2021 or 13.04.2021 are covered by new regime of taxation for reopening of assessment u/s. 148 of the Act. The ld.counsel stated that this issue is no res-integra now because the CBDT in its instruction i.e., Instruction No.1/2022 [F.No.279/Misc/M-51/2022-ITJ] has issued clarification for implementation of decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs. Ashish Agarwal reported in [2022] 138 taxmann.com 64. The ld.counsel for the assessee stated that the issue before Hon ble Supreme Court was of extended re-assessment notice extended in term of Notific ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r is likely to amount to less than fifty lakh rupees. Separate instruction shall be issued regarding procedure for disposing these cases. In view of the above, the ld.counsel stated that the assessee s case squarely fall in the aforesaid instruction issued by CBDT and the Hon ble Supreme Court has already considered the issue where the escaped income is less than Rs. 50 lakhs. He stated that in the present case before the Bench, the escaped income is Rs. 29,20,000/- only. Hence, according to ld.counsel, the issue is fully covered and the AO cannot assume jurisdiction for reopening of assessment under the new regime of taxation u/s. 148/148A of the Act. 5. On the other hand, the ld. CIT-DR relied on CBDT notification No.20/2021/F.No.370142/35/2020-TPL dated 31.03.2021 and he has produced one chart depicting dates and issue, which read as under:- Sl. No. Date Remark 1 Proposal for reopening 08.03.2021 The case was reopened beyond 6 year. Hence approval was taken from CIT, Intl.Taxn. (approved on 15.03.2021) 2 Notice u/s 148 vide DIN No.1031619292 (1) 19.03.2021 Despatched by post on 22.03.2021 3 Notice u/s 149 vide DIN No.1031619292(2) 13.04.2021 The notice u/s. 148 for the AY 2013-1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
