TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1996 (7) TMI 565
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n individual. For the assessment year 1992-93, the assessment was completed under an order dated 27-1-1993. For the assessment year 1995-96, the assessment was completed by an order dated 29-3-1996. During the assessment year 1995-96, the petitioner had sold the commercial premises on the ground floor of the building known as 'Sana' at Santacruz (West), Mumbai-400 054 for a consideration of ₹ 4.85 crores. Before the Assessing Officer, it was claimed by the petitioner that he acquired the said premises pursuant to an agreement dated 10-10-1988 between the petitioner and the landlord Yusuf M. Lakdawala. It was also claimed by the petitioner that the landlord had given possession to him on 10-6-1991. In computing the capital gain, the pe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed property worth ₹ 2,83,57,500 in lieu of his tenancy rights which cost him nothing and for which he did not have any subletting rights, the department would have tried to bring the said amount to tax in that year. The Assessing Officer also observed that the situation has been so created that neither the assessee nor the landlord has to pay any substantial sum by way of tax to the Government. This is all due to creation of certain documents by virtue of which the assessee became the alleged owner of the reconstructed property as on 10-6-1991. Finally, the Assessing Officer allowed only the actual cost that the assessee has paid to the landlord as the cost of acquisition and on that basis fixed ₹ 4,74,24,955 as the long-term ca....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... petition, the department has filed the counter-affidavit of K.R. Sreenivasan, Asstt. Commissioner. It is averred in the affidavit that the impugned notice under section 148 has been issued to the petitioner in the light of the disclosures made by the petitioner during the course of assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1995-96. It is further averred that these disclosures were not made in the relevant assessment year 1992. Therefore, after recording reasons and obtaining necessary approval, the said notice under section 148 has been issued. It is averred that it is evident that the assessee claims to have acquired a capital asset in the assessment year 1992-93, but these facts were not disclosed in the assessment year in question.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on of Allahabad High Court in Gulab Chand's case (supra) does not lay down the correct legal position. He brought to my notice the judgment of Calcutta High Court in B.K. Roy (P.) Ltd. [1995] 211 ITR 500, wherein Suhas Chandra Sen, J. as he then was, held that the judgment of the Allahabad High Court has not been correctly decided and the acquisition of the premises in lieu of surrender of tenancy rights cannot constitute income in the hands of the assessee. The counsel urged that the only object of issuing the notice is to tax the assessee on the basis of the judgment of Allahabad High Court which is squarely contrary to the view of this Court. The counsel also brought to my notice the order passed by the Division Bench of Dr. Saraf and Dh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e for interference under article 226 at this stage. It is true that certain decisions relied upon by Mr. Bhujle support the assessee's contention that compensation or alternative property received by the tenant in lieu of surrender of tenancy rights is not taxable. However, I do not see anything wrong if the department wants to examine the question of genuineness of the transactions since admittedly this information was not available to the Assessing Officer during the relevant year. In Phool Chand Bajrang Lal v. ITO [1993] 203 ITR 456, the Supreme Court while discussing the nature and scope of the power of the ITO to reopen an assessment under section 147(a) observed : "An Income-tax Officer acquires jurisdiction to reopen an assessm....