TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (7) TMI 239
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....abad to the effect that the land bearing Survey No.731 situated at village Makarba, Taluka & District Ahmedabad was sold by the assessee for a consideration of Rs. 7,15,000/- to one Shri Jasraj M. Jain. It also came to the notice of the Department during the search operation carried out in the case of "Ornet" group that this land was mortgaged by the assessee to Ahmedabad Mercantile Co-operative Bank Ltd. for a consideration of Rs. 65 lakhs. Before the sale of land by the assessee, the charge was released by the bank on payment of Rs. 65 lakhs. Armed with this information, the AO had issued notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act dated 31.3.2010, because, the assessee had not filed any return of income for this assessment year. Ultim....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... "Order Giving Effect to ITAT's Order In view of, the Hon'ble ITAT's Order No, ITA No. 496/AHD/2012 dated 22/03/2013, the Appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) dated 11.01.2011 has been set-aside and matter is remanded back to the file of A O. to decide the issue afresh and after granting reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee thus, the revised total assessed income comes at Rs. 21,091/- (10000 standard deduction. + 1091 income from other source) Sd/- Date- 28.03.2013 (R. N. Meena) Income tax Officer, Ward-10(4) Ahmedabad. 5. Thereafter, the ld.AO has passed an order under section 154 of the Act. This reads as under: "ORDER U/S 154 OF THE IT ACT. 1961 In the assessee c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... exercised only when the mistake, which is sought to be rectified, is an obvious and patent mistake, which is apparent from the record and not a mistake, which is required to be established by arguments and long drawn process of reasoning on points, on which there may conceivably be two opinions. 9. A perusal of the order dated 11.9.2014, it reveals that the AO has observed that income of the assessee was wrongly recomputed at Rs. 21,091/-. In his understanding it was an apparent error. But what is the basis to arrive at this belief is not discernible from the impugned order. When the ITAT has set aside the issue for fresh adjudication, the AO was supposed to pass an assessment order. The order dated 28.3.2013 can be equated to an order by....