TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (1) TMI 48
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....The learned CIT(A) ought to have held that the AO has exceeded his/her jurisdiction u/s 147 of the IT.Act, 1961, and therefore, notice u/s 148 issued ',as not valid, in the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law. 2. The learned CITIA) ought to have held that the AO could not have made the assessment based on Section 50C of the IT.Act, without making a reference to the Valuation Officer, contemplated in Section 50C(2) of the 1.T.Act, for such a reference, inspite of request of the appellant, in the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law. 3. The learned CIT(A) ought to have held that the impugned order of assessment made by the AO was not valid, n the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....opening of assessment on the ground that notice issued u/s.148 does not say that it was issued with due approval of the competent authority, as required u/s.151 of the Act. The assessee has also challenged differential value of sale consideration on the ground that he had entered into an agreement for purchase of the property in the year 1997 and paid substantial consideration of Rs. 1,35,000/- by fixing sale value of the property at Rs. 1,85,000/-, therefore, value as on date of registration of property, although it was more than the amount stated in registered document cannot be considered as fair market value for the purpose of computation of capital gain. The Assessing Officer was not convinced with the explanation furnished by the asse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... him which leads to a conclusion that income chargeable to tax had been escaped assessment, therefore, there is no merit in the legal ground taken by the assessee. 5. As regards the addition made towards differential value of sale consideration by invoking the provisions of section 50C of the Act, the learned CIT(A) observed that although the assessee has claimed that Assessing Officer in violation of section 50C(2) of the Act has proceeded to compute the value of sale consideration as per section 50C(1) of the Act, but the fact remains that a careful reading of section 50C(2) of the Act would highlight the conditions on which the Assessing Officer is mandated to refer the matter to the valuation officer. Since the assessee has failed to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fficer need not prove escapement of income, but what is required to be seen is whether materials in the possession of the Assessing Officer, prima-facie suggested escapement of income or not . In this case, based on material available on record, the Assessing Officer has arrived at reasonable belief of escapement of income and hence, there is no merit in the arguments taken by the learned counsel for the assessee challenging the validity of reassessment. As regards, computation of long term capital gain by taking full value of consideration as mandated u/s.50C of the Act, the authorities below have brought out clear facts to the effect that there is clear difference in sale consideration recorded in registered sale deed and value adopted by....