9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (5) TMI 1470X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lse assumption that the assessee has not filed his return of income for the A-Y 2012-13 while the assessee apparently and admittedly has already filed his original return of income on 30-09-2012 declaring income at Rs. 53,78,510/-. 1.2 That the Id. CIT(A) has committed gross illegality in upholding the reassessment of the appellant without recording reasons of 'escaped assessment' on the issues wholly uncounted with the issue on which the re-assessment proceedings were initiated. 1.3 That the ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in sustaining the additions beyond the reasons recorded u/s. 147 separately for the issues which allegedly came to AO's notice subsequently during assessment. 2. That the sustenance of the best judgment assessment passed u/s. 144 of the Income Tax Act by the Id. CIT(A) is bad in law in view of the fact that after issuance of notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act, the AO has not issued any notice u/s. 144 providing opportunity of hearing to appellant-assessee. 3. That the Id. CIT(A) has committed gross illegality in making a trading addition of Rs. 33,94,084/- against the appellant-assessee. 4. That the Id. CIT (A) has committed gross illegality in uph ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e sale of the property has not been shown by the assessee. Thus, Ld AO have reason that income of Rs. 11,04,606/- for the year under consideration has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961. Accordingly a notice u/s 148 was issued on 29/03/2019, which was duly served upon the assessee. After that the case was received on transfer from ITO, Ward-3(1), Jaipur to ITO, Ward- 3(3), Jaipur in compliance to order u/s 127 of the I.T. Act of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Jaipur. Due to change of incumbent, a notice u/s 142(1) along with questionnaire was issued on 17.06.2019 & 10.07.2019, which was served through postal authorities and also on ITBA. On the given date no one attended nor filed any submission where as assessee has neither filed return of income for the A.Y. 2012-13 or in response to notice issued u/s 148 nor any written reply furnished in response to notice issued u/s 142(1). Therefore in these circumstances a show cause was issued to the assessee on 11.10.2019. 3.1 In response to above notices and show cause notice, Ld. A/R of the assessee attended filed a POA and made submission along with ITR for A.Y. 2012-13 on 30.09.2012 and on 19 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee has failed to furnish the same. Therefore, in absence of cost of acquisition no deduction was considered as allowable on account cost of acquisition. Considering this facts, the total sale consideration amounting to Rs. 11,04,606/- adopted by the Sub Registrar was treated as short term capital gain of the assessee and added to the total income. 4. Being aggrieved, from the said order of assessment the assessee has filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) after hearing the contention of the assessee dismissed the appeal of the assessee by giving following findings on the issue:- "In view of the facts of the appellant case it is beyond doubt that the appellant is not bothered for the fate of appeal. The appellant has filed the present appeal merely to file an appeal. Thus, it is obvious that the appellant is not interested in disposal of appeal, since the appellant has nothing to say in regard to addition made by the AO and merely filing of appeal is not enough, the appellant is expected to reply to opportunity granted during appeal but the appellant did not do so. In this scenario, the appeal is being decided on the basis of material on record and merit. G ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 29/03/201,9 which was duly served upon the assessee." There was enough material to validate that the reassessment proceedings are valid. Since in this case there is a clear link between information available with AO and his formation of belief that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment, reopening of assessment is justified. Therefore the ground of the appellant assessee is dismissed. Reliance is placed on the following case laws- 1. [2021] 129 taxmann.com 327 (Madras) HIGH COURT OF MADRAS Cognizant Technology Solutions India (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Large Taxpayer Unit, Chennai 2. [2021] 129 taxmann.com 376 (Madras) HIGH COURT OF MADRAS Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Corporate Circle-1(1), Chennai v. Daimler India Commercial Vehicles (P.) Ltd. 3. [2021] 130 taxmann.com 111 (Madras) HIGH COURT OF MADRAS Dr. Sajan Hedge v. Assistant Commissioner of income-tax 4. [2021] 130 taxmann.com 157 (Madras) HIGH COURT OF MADRAS SL Lumax Ltd. v Deputy Commissioner of income-tax, Corporate Circle VI-2, Chennai 5. [2021] 130 taxmann.com 356 (Madras) HIGH COURT OF MADRAS Consolidated Construction Consortium Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax, C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Rajasthan) HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN Jawari Lal Lunia v. Union Of India. "Section 69A, read with section 147, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 Unexplained moneys (Shares) Assessment year 2015-2016 Assessing Officer was having information indicating that certain operators, syndicate members and brokers were indulging in providing accommodation entries, often times creating penny stock companies and using them as conduit for converting untaxed income by bringing them on record by paying no tax claiming it to be long term capital gain tax on sale of shares which was at relevant time exempted One such company found to be indulging in such activities was LLDPL Assessing Officer sought to reopen assessment in case of assessee on ground that assessee, during relevant period had purchased shares in said company LLDPL at very low price and after that, price of these shares had risen phenomenally and they were sold at high price and in process, assessee had claimed long term capital gains Assessing Officer formed belief that there had been price rigging and manipulation in trading of scrip of LLDPL and assessee not being a regular investor had earned bogus long term capital gains by investing in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ceedings initiated under section 148 Assessee also gave detailed history of transactions of sale and purchase of land by it Thus, it could not be said that assessee was not aware of reasons for reopening of assessment Further, assessee himself had not asked for speaking order - Whether having given up right to ask for a speaking order, assessee could not now turn around and question impugned reassessment order Held, yes Whether, therefore, impugned writ petition was to be dismissed - Held, yes [Paras 21 and 22] [In favour of revenue]." 16. [2022] 140 taxmann.com 338 (Allahabad) HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD Distributors India C and F v. Union of India. "Section 28(1), read with sections 147 and 148, of the Income-tax Act, 1961- Business income Chargeable as (Reassessment) Assessment year 2013-14 Assessing Officer issued on assessee a notice under section 148 seeking to reopen assessment for reasons that as per Form No. 26AS assessee's total receipt under sections 1944, 194C and 194J was of Rs. 5.23 crores, whereas in profit and loss account it had shown total receipts at Rs. 2.61 crores which was short by 2.62 crores and this gave rise to a reason to believe that assessee did not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s miserably failed to substantiate its claim, therefore, the AO is justified in making the addition by estimating the net profit of the appellant amounting to Rs. 33,93,084/-. The addition made by AO is conservative & reasonable and is upheld the plea of the appellant on this issue is dismissed. Therefore this ground is hereby dismissed. Ground No. 4 (i) The Id AO erred by adding an Rs. 1104606/-on account of Short Term Capital Gain inspite of the facts that sale of property was credited to Profit and Loss Account The earned AO has erred on facts and in law by not considering the replies filled by the assessee. On this ground the AO observed that "During the year the assessee has sold an immoveable property for a sales consideration of Rs. 11,04,606 On perusal of ITR assessee has not shown STCG/LTCG on this transaction. During the course of assessment proceeding the assessee was asked to furnish the complete details of this property. i.e. computation of capital gain, cost of acquisition etc. But assessee has failed to furnish the same. Therefore, in absence of cost of acquisition no deduction is allowable on account cost of acquisition. Considering the above, the total ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder of the ld. CIT (A) the assessee has preferred the present appeal before us on the grounds as reiterated in para 2 above. The ld. AR of the assessee filed a detailed paper book in support of the contentions raised in this appeal. The index of the document submitted by the ld. AR of the assessee are as under:- S. No. Particulars Page No. 1. Copy of sale deed Registered on 24-09-2010 vide which assessee purchased plot of land 39-48 2. Copy of sale deed registered on 29-05-2012 vide which assessee sold flat No. G-1 49-63 3. Copy of sale deed registered on 22-07-2011 vide which assessee sold flat No. G-2 64-79 4. Copy of sale deed registered on 23-02-2012 vide which assessee sold flat No. G-3 80-93 5. Copy of sale deed registered on 29-04-2015 vide which assessee sold flat No. F-1 94-107 6. Copy of sale deed registered on 08-07-2011 vide which assessee sold flat No.F-2 108-121 7. Copy of sale deed registered on 13-07-2011 vide which assessee sold flat No. F-3 122-131 8. Copy of sale deed registered on 13-03-2012 vide which assessee sold flat No. S-1 132-143 9. Copy of sale deed registered on 16-06-2011 vide which assessee sold flat No. S-2 144-157 10. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the Ld. CIT(A) has passed four line order and dismissed the appeal. Before us, Ld. AR for the assessee submitted paper book containing 198 pages and requested with grounds so raised by the assessee that since at both stage the assessee could not produce the documents the assessee be permitted to place on record concerning the issues of various addition so made. Taking into consideration of facts and circumstances of the case in our considered view the matter is required to be set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) in the interest of justice, who will decide the issue afresh by providing sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Thus, the matter is restored back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) who will decide the issue based on evidence and submission of the assessee. However, the assessee will not seek any adjournment on frivolous ground and remain cooperative during proceedings before the ld. CIT(A). 9. Before parting, we may make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute, which shall be adjudicated by the ld. CIT(A) independently in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
