TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (9) TMI 410
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....culating the amount of capital gain, no benefit of cost of improvement etc., was considered and challenged the levy of interest under section 234B and 234C of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2. Briefly the facts of the case are that as per CIB information received by the A.O, the assessee has sold immovable property as per sale consideration of Rs. 10 lakhs in assessment year under appeal and stamp duty was paid at Rs. 12,18,000/-. Hence, there was a difference of Rs. 2,18,000/- appeared in both the valuations. Hence, to assess the capital gain arising on sale of immovable property as per provisions of Section 50C of the I.T. Act, proceedings under section 147 of the I.T. Act have been initiated by issuing notice under section 148 of the I.T. Act vi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and hence, assessee did not get adequate opportunity to explain the facts. The Ld. CIT(A), however, noted that in the appellate proceedings and remand proceedings adequate opportunity have been provided, therefore, assessee should not have any grievance and the same was accordingly dismissed. 4. The assessee further submitted before Ld. CIT(A) that A.O. has not allowed the assessee cost of acquisition and cost of improvement expenses totaling to Rs. 10,74,842/-. The Ld. CIT(A) noted that in the written submissions assessee has furnished calculation for long term capital gains from which it is apparent that assessee has no objection with regard to full value of consideration determined in accordance with the provisions of Section 50C on ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... sufficient time was given to assessee to argue the appeal. However, on the date of hearing on 09.08.2018 Shri Navin Kumar Garg, F.C.A. appeared for the assessee and made further request for adjournment because the earlier Counsel Shri N.K. Chandna, Advocate withdrew his Power of Attorney. Considering the facts of the case and that sufficient opportunity was already granted to assessee to argue the appeal, the appeal was adjourned to 10.08.2018. Thereafter, Learned Counsel for the Assessee, withdrew the request for adjournment and seek permission to argue the appeal. Learned Counsel for the Assessee was, therefore, permitted to argue the appeal on 09.08.2018, date of hearing already fixed. 6.1. Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essment order before Ld. CIT(A). The assessee did not challenge the findings of the A.O. that assessee did not cooperate in re-assessment proceedings. The assessee challenged the determination of the capital gains without giving general exemption of Rs. 1 lakh which is already allowed by the Ld. CIT(A). The assessee in another ground of appeal, challenged the assessment order because assessee was not given opportunity before issue of notice under section 148 of the I.T. Act. There is no law to give opportunity to hear the assessee before issuing notice under section 148 of the I.T. Act. The assessee has not filed even copy of the reasons recorded for reopening of the assessment in the matter. Therefore, the validity of re-assessment proceed....