TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (4) TMI 954
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Mr. Karan Sanghani waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondent. 1.2 Heard learned advocate Mr. Darshan Patel for the petitioner and learned advocate Mr. Karan Sanghani for the respondent-Income Tax Authority. 2. The challenge in this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution is directed against notice dated 30.3.2018 issued by the assessing officer against the petitioner under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in respect of the Assessment Year 2011-2012 seeking to reopen the assessment of the petitioner for the year under consideration. It was stated in the notice that for the said assessment year 2011-2012, the income chargeable to tax had escaped the assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Income Tax ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er, 2018 that the immovable property was sold by the petitioner assessee alongwith four other persons for the total sale consideration of Rs. 9 crorers. It was stated that the return of income was filed for the Assessment Year 2011- 2012 after considering the capital gains, the computation of income was duly reflected and 1/5th share of the value of the sale of the immovable property-bungalow was also shown. There is no dispute about the fact that the sale of the immovable property bungalow was by five joint owners having equal share. 3.3 In the order dated 25.09.2018 disposing of the the objections raised by the respondent-assessee, the assessing officer stated thus, to arrive at the conclusion that he had reasons to believe that income h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....en issued and no assessment under section 143(3) had been framed." 4. While learned advocate for the petitioner submitted with reference to the details mentioned in the return of income for the year under consideration figuring on record that 1/5th share in the bungalow and other attendant facts were mentioned and thereafter the entire action to reopen the assessment was without any basis, on the other hand, learned advocate for the respondent relied on the affidavit-in-reply filed by the respondent to contend on that basis that the return of the petitioner was accepted under section 143(1) of the Act without scrutiny. 4.1 It was submitted that assessing officer had reopened the case beyond the period of four years from the end of the re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ount received towards share of sale consideration in the bond and in flat. The amounts in that regard to the tune of Rs. 50 lakhs, and Rs. 51,44,806, totalling Rs. 1,01,44,806/- was mentioned. After working out other figures and details, the gross total income was shown to be 3,95,497/- and the net income was Rs. 41,500/-. The return was duly processed. 5.2 Thus, the petitioner duly showed her sale proceeds of Rs. 1.80 crores. She computed the value of the property as on 1.4.1981, which was the date of purchase of property at Rs. 10.89 lakhs (approximated), and the index cost of property at Rs. 77.48 lakhs and deducted Rs. 90,000/- by way of transfer expense. Also mentioned in the return of income was the investment to the tune of Rs. 1.01....