TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (1) TMI 1230
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... light of Rule 18(6) of the ITAT Rules. 3. Let us first understand the position of settled law in respect of the powers conferred upon the ld. Commissioner u/s. 263 of the Act. It is a settled position of law that powers u/s 263 of the Act can be exercised by the Commissioner on satisfaction of twin conditions, i.e., the assessment order should be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. By 'erroneous' is meant contrary to law. Thus, this power cannot be exercised unless the Commissioner is able to establish that the order of the Assessing Officer is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. Thus, where there are two possible views and the Assessing Officer has taken one of the possible views, no action to exercise powers of revision can arise, nor can revisional power be exercised for directing a fuller enquiry to find out if the view taken is erroneous, when a view has already been taken after enquiry. This power of revision can be exercised only where no enquiry, as required under the law, is done. It is not open to enquire in case of inadequate inquiry. Our view is fortified by the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ction 53A of the Transfer of Property Act r.w. corresponding Section 17(1) of the Indian Registration Act. Which means that the assessee has transferred the impugned lands to the vendee concerned in F.Y. 2007-08 relevant to A.Y. 2008-09. In A.Y. 2008-09, the assessee offered the capital gains arising out of the above transaction and paid the taxes as per the provisions of the law. In our considered opinion, there is no wrong assumption of law so far as the tax liability of capital gains is concerned. The impugned lands were transferred for the purposes of capital gains tax liability in F.Y. 2007-08 relevant to A.Y. 2008-09 on giving possessions of the impugned lands to R.Y. Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. 9. Now let us see whether there was any wrong assumption of facts. The agreement to sell dated 27.03.2007 alongwith the possession agreement dated 04.05.2007 are exhibited at pages 178 to 263 of the paper book. Both these agreements were executed in the presence of public notary. The consideration of Rs. 28.35 lacs was received by the assessee on the date of entering the sale agreement and the balance of Rs. 6,000/- was received on giving the quite possession. The possession was given....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he A.O. while framing the assessment order 15. Now let us consider the show cause notice issued by the Principal CIT and the same reads as under:- OFFICE OF THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-5 - AHMEDABAD ROOM NO. 127 - 1ST FLOOR - NARAYAN CHAMBERS B/H. PATANG HOTEL. ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD TELEPHONE NO. 079-2657 6382 No.Pr.CIT-5/Ahm/Show Cause-263/2016-17 PAN: ADRPA6552F Date: 01.03.2017 To Smt. Kavita Vinodbhai Adani "Shikhar"-8lh Floor Mr. Mithakhali Circle Navrangpura, Ahmedabad Sir, Sub.: Show cause notice u/s. 263 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 A.Y. 2012-13- Regarding....... Please refer to the assessment order u/s. 143(3) dated 26/02/2015 for A.Y. 2012-13, which was finalized by the 1TO, Ward-5(2)(2). Ahmedabad, determining total income at Rs. 3,42,110/- as per returned income. 2. From the details filed during the course of assessment proceedings, it is noticed that theassessee has sold immovable property being Survey No. 220 & 221 situated at Dantali, Gandhinagai for an amount of Rs. 5,63,52,500/-. These properties were purchased by the asse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....considered by the A.O. and being satisfied with the transaction qua the relevant provisions of the Act, the assessment order was framed u/s. 143(3) of the Act:- 20. The Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in CIT vs. Nirma Chemical Works Ltd. 309 ITR 67 has observed that if assessment order were to incorporate the reasons for upholding the claim made by an assessee, the result would be an epitome and not an assessment order. In this case, during the assessment proceedings for both the Assessment Years, the Assessing Officer issued a query memo to the assessee, calling upon him to justify the genuineness of the gifts. The Respondent-Assessee responded to the same by giving evidence of the communications received from his father and his sister i.e. the donors of the gifts along with the statement of their Bank accounts. On perusal, the Assessing Officer was satisfied about the creditworthiness/capacity of the donors, the source from where these funds have come and also the creditworthiness/capacity of the donor. Once the Assessing Officer was satisfied with regard to the same, there was no further requirement on the part of the Assessing Officer to disclose his satisfaction in the Assess....