TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (3) TMI 221
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e from yet another common order dated 23.10.2012 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar (hereinafter referred to as, the Tribunal) in ITA Nos.190 to 192/Asr/2010 and ITA Nos.354 to 356/Asr/2012 respectively pertaining to the assessment year 1999-2000. 2. The first three appeals are qua quantum of income tax, whereas rest of those are against dismissal of the appeals of the revenue in relation to levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). 3. Facts and circumstances as also the question of law involved in all these appeals are the same. Hence, these appeals are taken up together for adjudication. 4. For convenience and clarity, facts have be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....quisition of his land situated at village Mansoorwal Dona, District Kapurthala. The assessee had not furnished his return of income. Finding it to be a case of income having escaped assessment for the assessment year 1999-2000 by reason of failure on the part of the assessee to make a return under Section 139 of the Act, after recording reasons and obtaining necessary approval from the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Range-IV), Jalandhar, notice under Section 148 of the Act was served on the assessee on 21.3.2006. He did not furnish his return even then. Thereafter, notice under Section 142(1) of the Act was issued on 2.1.2006 along with a questionnaire. The assessee neither attended the office of the named Income Tax authority in the not....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....only agriculture land which had been acquired, was of no legal value. It was pleaded that his address was available with PUDA, Jalandhar and had the AO made some genuine efforts, his address could have been obtained from his bank account or from the office of Land Acquisition Collector, PUDA, Jalandhar and from the Income Tax Department itself where the assessee was allegedly assessed for the assessment year 1999-2000. It was elaborated that the assessment proceedings for the year 1999-2000 had already been finalised by the revenue through his power of attorney Jarnail Singh. 10. Consequently, on 18.2.2008, the Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar-II, Jalandhar (hereinafter referred to as the CIT) accepting version of the assessee had s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fficer, Kapurthala-I, Kapurthala had held that the jurisdiction over the case of the assessee was rightly vested with it. Making calculations and taking into account quantum of compensation received as Rs.1,04,54,474/-, long term capital gain was computed at Rs.26,50,340/-. Penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act were also initiated separately for concealment of income in terms of order (Annexure A-3) of the Income Tax Officer, Kapurthala-I, Kapurthala. This order was challenged in appeal by the assessee; it was dismissed. 12. Aggrieved with the said order, the assessee went in appeal before the Tribunal. Vide order dated 21.5.2012 (Annexure A-5), the Tribunal accepted version of the assessee by holding that notices should....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the revenue that once service of notice under Section 148, 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act was held to be bad observing that the assessee was no more residing at the last known address and was accessible only through his attorney Jarnail Singh, it was incumbent on the Tribunal not to quash the whole proceedings as it amounted to leaving the assessee go scot-free, though he is liable to pay tax on the capital gains. It is nowhere denied that compensation for compulsory acquisition of the land was received by the assessee. As such, he cannot deny his liability to pay long term capital gain tax. Merely because there was some error in service of notices on the assessee, statutory liability of the assessee to pay tax on capital gain was not over.....