Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful)

TaxTMI AI Drafter workflow from input facts to final legal draft Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2016 (11) TMI 1563

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he Counsel for the assessee took an additional plea challenging the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer in issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act. It is the say of the Counsel that the issue challenging the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer can be raised at this stage even if the same was not raised before the lower authorities. 3. We heard the ld. Counsel at length on this additional plea. The ld. DR simply relied upon the findings of the Assessing Officer. 4. After giving a thoughtful consideration to the additional plea taken by the ld. Counsel, we find that objection to jurisdiction, even if taken for the first time before the Tribunal, is permissible. Our view is fortified by the decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt and sale of residential plots. The assessee has filed return of income of Rs. 21,94,16,8687/. The total income is determined at Rs. 21,99,31,210/- for the year 2007-08. The assessee company declared total income of Rs. 21,94,16,868/- for the year 2007-08. The total income includes Rs. 1,03,81,135/- as income from house property on account of leased out area of Iscon Mall, Rajkot, on which 30% standard deduction of Rs. 31,14.341/- was claimed under section 24 of the Act. Audit scrutiny of the records revealed that the construction / development of the Iscon Mall, Rajkot had been carried out by the assessee from the PY 2005-06 and completed in PY 2006-07. The construction cost of Rs. 4,37,68,672/- incurred during AY 2006-07 was shown WIP a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Income-tax Rules. The Mumbai ITAT (Special Branch) in case of Daga Capital has held that Rule 8D if the Income-tax Rules would have retrospective operation. It was seen from assessment records of the assessee that assessee incurred interest expenditure to the extent of Rs. 5,03,32,591/- during the F.Y.2006- 07. The assessee earned dividend income to the tune of Rs. 21,336/- in the F.Y.06-07. However, proportionate interest paid during the year was not disallowed in view of the provisions cited above. Due to this income of the assessee was assessed less to the extent of Rs. 2,15,14,609/- with consequent short levy of tax and interest to the extent of Rs. 96,31,617/-. Therefore I have reason to believe that for th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of Income Amount Remarks 1 5% share of profit from partnership firm M/s. JP Construction 727585 Contra confirmation with ITR ackn Exhibit-13 2 Mutual Fund Dividend 21336 A/c copy Exhibit-14 In this regard no any expenditure claimed to earn exempt income" "14. Your goodself has called for to explain why the rental income should not be treated as income from House Property and give details of all the expenses relatable to lease rental ( Para 07 of Annexure to notice dated 08.10.09) In this regard, it is furnished that rent is received from brands for providing shops / showrooms in ISCON Mall, Rajkot, part of rent of is transferred to the investors, who ultimately buys shops / showrooms.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on to reopen the assessment. Therefore, post 1st April, 1989, power to reopen is much wider. However, one needs to give a schematic interpretation to the words "reason to believe" failing which, we are afraid, s. 147 would give arbitrary powers to the AO to reopen assessments on the basis of "mere change of opinion", which cannot be per se reason to reopen. We must also keep in mind the conceptual difference between power to review and power to reassess. The AO has no power to review; he has the power to reassess. But reassessment has to be based on fulfillment of certain pre-condition and if the concept of "change of opinion" is removed, as contended on behalf of the Department, then, in the garb of reopening the assessment, review would t....