TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (3) TMI 437
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as illegal and without jurisdiction. 2. For the Assessment Year 2013-14, since the period to make regular assessment under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (In short 'the Act') was over, the Revenue seems to have assessed the original assessee, who is the father of the petitioner under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act. It is to be noted that, the assessment order dated 27.06.2017 was reopened under Section 147 of the Act, where there had been some reasons given by the Revenue as to on what basis the assessing authority has reasons to believe that there has been an escape of assessment and on that footing, the assessing authority proceeded to assess the income of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....09.09.2021 itself reads thus, "With reference to the above, I wish to state as follows: 1. I acknowledge the receipt of your above stated notice in relation to Financial Year ended 31.03.2013 relevant to Assessment Year 2013-14. In relation to this assessment year, I have duly filed my original return of income vide e-filing 721041880310713 on 31.07.2013. 2. Further in relation to above assessment year and in response to my above stated return of income duly filed u/s.139, I have been assessed U/s.143(1) by your good office and further u/s.143(3) read with Section 147 vide assessment order dated 27.06.2017. 3. In response to your above referred notice u/s.148, I have again e-filed the return for above assessment year vide ack.no.344....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....income of Rs. 5,15,030/-. It is seen from the computation that the assessee had computed long term capital loss at Rs. 71,388/- by selling the shares at Rs. 28,99,951/- and indexed cost of acquisition of Rs. 29,71,339/-. Since the claim of long term capital loss is not conclusively proved, the sale consideration of Rs. 28,99,951/- is to be brought to tax net. Thus the assessee has not truly and fully disclosed all materials in the return of income. Hence, I am satisfied that the said amount of Rs. 28,99,951/- is to be treated as undisclosed income of the assessee. In view of the above, I have reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment within the meaning of provisions of Sec.147 of the Act." 10. Only at this ju....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 28,99,951/- and indexed cost of acquisition of Rs. 29,71,339/-. 13. Since the claim of long term capital loss is not conclusively proved, the sale consideration of Rs. 28,99,951/- is to be brought to tax net. Thus the assessee has not truly and fully disclosed all materials in the return of income and the assessing officer has stated that, he has reasons to believe that the said amount is to be treated as undisclosed income of the assessee and that is the reason why the Revenue wanted to reopen the assessment under Section 147. 14. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that, the very same reason had been given in the earlier occasion when it was reopened under Section 147, which in fact concluded in the assessment order d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e pursuant to which when return was filed, where, even though it has been mentioned that it is verified by the present petitioner, who is the son of the original assessee, in the column "in the capacity of", the petitioner has not filled anything and it has been left blank. 17. Learned Standing Counsel also pointed out that, in the letter dated 09.09.2021, where the petitioner had sought for the reasons for reopening the assessment under Section 147 also, nowhere it was stated specifically that the original assessee ie., the father of the petitioner is no more. In fact the said letter has been issued in the name of the original assessee represented by the petitioner, as if that the petitioner has the power of attorney of the original asses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arlier occasion or not cannot be decided now because no document to that effect has been filed by the petitioner, for which the petitioner's counsel expressed the inability of the petitioner because, this all happened during the lifetime of the original assessee ie., the father of the petitioner. 22. Be that as it may. Now the said plea is raised. It is a valid plea to be considered by the Revenue and in this regard, the assessing authority can very well compare the reasons given by the Revenue for reopening the assessment under Section 147 of the Act on the earlier occasion, which ended in the assessment order dated 27.06.2017, where the return of income filed disclosing an income of Rs. 5,16,710/- was accepted and if it is so, accord....