TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (3) TMI 1044
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng therein for quashing of the order dated 10.02.2022 (Annexure-7); whereby the objection preferred by the petitioner to the reassessment notice for the AY 2017-18 has been rejected by holding that the Assessing Officer had sufficient reasons to re-open the case and also for quashing of the entire proceeding for reassessment of the petitioner pertaining to the AY 2017-18 including the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("Act" for the short) dated 30.03.2021 (Annexure-3) and notice dated 03.12.2021 (Annexure-5). 2. The brief facts as disclosed in the instant writ application is that the petitioner had filed his revised return of income disclosing sale of ancestral agricultural land made by him in the AY 2017-18, income a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as of Rs. 22,57,500/- and the same was disclosed in the income tax return of the petitioner for the AY 2017-18. He further submits that the reasons for reopening was thus incorrect and without any basis. Learned counsel contended that it is a settled law that reasons must speak for themselves and any subsequent attempt to supply the omission at the stage of an order disposing of the objections raised by the Assessee or providing them in the counter affidavit is impermissible. Learned counsel draws attention of this Court towards the rejection letter dated 10.02.2022 whereby objection preferred by the petitioner was rejected and submits that at paragraph-7, the AO had categorically stated that he has reason to re-open the case under Secti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that it is clear from Schedule -A of the sale deed dated 22.03.2017 (Annexure-2 to the writ petition) that the nature of the land sold by the petitioner is residential land and not agricultural land as falsely claimed by the petitioner in its computation of income and also in the instant writ petition. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner had made false statement on oath before this Court specifically at paragraph-8 of the instant petition that the land sold by the petitioner is an agricultural land. However, the land sold is residential land and not agricultural land. Such conduct of the petitioner disentitles him to get any relief from this Court under the writ jurisdiction. He further submits that the petitioner for the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....xure-7) holding therein at paragraph-7 as under:- "7. The AO has concrete reasons to reopen the case under Section 148. It is observed that the assessee had during the year under consideration purchased immovable property valued of Rs. 1,80,60,000/- on 09.03.2017. Sl. No. Date of payment Amount Mode 1 09.03.2017 1,80,60,000/- - Hence, it is correct that approval under section 151(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been rightly granted to issue notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the AY2017- 18 relevant to FY-2016-17. The AO has sufficient reasons and concrete reasons to re-open the case and issue notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961." 6. After going thro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he material particulars would get supplemented, by the time the matter reaches to the Court, on the strength of affidavit or oral submissions advanced. Admittedly, in the instant case the AO has referred that the Assessee had purchased immovable property valued of Rs. 1,80,60,000/- on 9.3.2017; whereas the fact is divergent. As such, the notice issued for initiation of reassessment proceeding does not have any legs to stand in the eye of law. 8. However, this Court is conscious about the fact that from Schedule -A of the sale deed dated 22.03.2017 (Annexure-2 to the writ petition) it appears that the nature of the land sold by the petitioner and cosharers was a residential land and not agricultural land as claimed by the petitioner in it....