TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (12) TMI 159
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1. The Order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals] 3, Bengaluru, passed under section 250 of the Act dated 18/11/2019 in so far as it is against the appellant is opposed to law, equity, weight of evidence, probabilities and the facts and circumstances in the Appellant's case. 2. The Appellant denies herself liable to be taxed over and above the reported total income of Rs. 4,05,750/ -by the appellant on the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals] failed to appreciate that the assessment order u/s. 143[3] r.w.s. 144 of the Act dated 21/03/2016 passed by the assessing officer is bad in law since the mandatory conditions for re-opening as envisaged in the Act....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gned land conveyed to be a capital asset and invoking provisions of Section 50C of the Act thereof on the facts and circumstances of the case. 7. Without further prejudice to the above, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals] failed to appreciate that the impugned land sold by the Appellant is an agricultural land and not exigible to tax as per the provisions of section 2[14] of the Act, on the facts and circumstances of the case. 8. Without prejudice to the right to seek waiver as per the parity of reasoning of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Karanvir Singh 349 ITR 692, the Appellant denies itself liable to be charged to interest under section 234 A and 234 C of the Income Tax Act on the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he case of ITO Vs. late Shri. Somnath Malhotra through Smt. Raj Rani Malhotra in ITA No.519/Del/2013 dated 02.07.2015 available on pages 28 to 34 of the Paper Book. b) Judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of Rajender Kumar Sehgal Vs. ITO as reported in 101 taxmann.com 233 (Del) copy available on pages 54 to 58 of Paper Book. c) Judgment of Hon'ble Madras High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs. M. Hemanathan as reported in 384 ITR 177 (Madras) copy available on pages 59 to 65 of the Paper Book. 3. He also submitted that the copy of notice issued by the AO under section 148 is available on page 22 of the Paper Book as per which it can be seen that such notice was issued by the AO on 11.03.2015 and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e said deceased assessee has intimated the Department that Mr. M. N.Harinath had had expired on 31.03.2009 due to heart problem. He submitted that from these facts, it is apparent that the Department was in knowledge of the death of the assessee but inspite of this, the notices under section 148 and 143(2) of the Act were issued in the name of the dead assessee and therefore, these judgments are applicable and the consequent Assessment Order is bad in law and should be quashed. 4. As against this, learned DR of the Revenue supported the orders of authorities below. He submitted that he wants to place reliance on three judicial pronouncements and he submitted that he will file the copy of the judgments in the course of the day. We waited ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....03.2010 in the name of the deceased assessee who had already expired on 06.12.2002 and therefore, the notice issued under section 148 was invalid and the assessment framed on the basis of the said invalid notice was void-ab-initio. In the case of Rajender Kumar Sehgal Vs. ITO (supra), it was noted by Hon'ble Delhi High Court that in another judgment rendered in the case of Vipin Walia Vs. ITO, 238 Taxman 1 (Delhi), it was held by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in that case that the ITO in that case was to initiate proceedings under section 147 of the Act against the deceased assessee for Assessment Year 2008-09 and the limitation for issuance of notice under section 147 / 148 of the Act was expiring on 31.03.2015 and on 27.03.2015, when an notic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that the notice under section 148 issued by the AO in the name of the deceased assessee is not valid and the Assessment Order in pursuance to such invalid notice has to be quashed. Regarding the judgments on which the learned DR of the Revenue sought to rely upon but copy not filed before us, we would like to observe that this is not the claim of the revenue that he wants to rely upon a judgment of Hon'ble apex court or of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in which a contrary view is taken under similar facts and therefore, even if some different view is taken in those judgments of any other High Court, which is not jurisdictional High Court, we have to follow those judgments in which the view in favour of the assessee has been taken and theref....