TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (6) TMI 481
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assailed the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal before us: "1. In the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) erred in ignoring the submissions made by appellant vide letter 26.12.2019 in totality and dismissing of the appeal without considering the submissions of the appellant. The action of CIT(A) dismissing the appeal is arbitrary, unlawful and not justified. 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the action of the A.O denying deduction u/s. 54B without appreciating the facts of the case properly and judiciously. The conclusion drawn by the A.O and upheld by the CIT(A) is not justified. 3. Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 49,51,437/....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....25.07.2012 sold 0.863 hectare of agricultural land situated at Village: Sejbahar, Khasra No.5/2 & 10/1, P.H. NO.119/50, Raipur-1 for a consideration of Rs. 69.04 lacs to M/s. R.L. Developers, Naya Raipur. On a perusal of the records, it was gathered by the A.O that the aforesaid piece of land was purchased by the assessee in two tranches, viz. (i) F.Y. 2006- 07 : Rs. 3,32,063/-; and (ii) F.Y.1993-94 : Rs. 43,335/-. It was further observed by the A.O that as the agricultural land sold by the assessee being situated within the specified distance from the municipal limits of Raipur Nagar Nigam was a capital asset as per clause (b) to Section 2(14)(iii) of the Act, therefore, the consideration received on the sale of the same was exigible to ca....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....579/- However, the aforesaid claim of the assessee was not fully accepted by the A.O. It was observed by the A.O that except for the agricultural land purchased by the assessee in his own name at Village: Alekhunta, Khasra No.381/2 on 28.09.2012, other investments in land did not qualify for deduction u/s. 54B of the Act, for the following reasons: "(i) The details of land purchased in the name of his brother as under: Village Agricultural land purchased in the name of Khasara No. Date of purchase Amount Rakhi In the name of Ram Kumar Sahu 246 27.02.2012 33,64,046/- Bhendsaar In the name of Yashwant Sahu 139 19.04.2012 1,63,430/- Total 35,27,476 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ccess. 6. The assessee being aggrieved with the order of the CIT(Appeals) has carried the matter in appeal before us. 7. As the Ld. Departmental Representative ("DR" for short) despite having been intimated about the hearing of the appeal had neither put up an appearance nor sought for any adjournment, therefore, we are constrained to dispose off the appeal as per Rule 25 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963, i.e. after hearing the Ld. AR and perusing the orders of the lower authorities. 8. We have heard the ld. AR and perused the orders of the lower authorities as well as considered the material available on record. 9. Shri R.B Doshi, Ld. Authorized Representative (for short "AR") for the assessee at the very outset assailed t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....record a letter dated 19.04.2023 of the ITO-4(1), Raipur, wherein it was, inter alia, stated by the A.O that after issuance of notice u/s. 148 of the Act dated 29.03.2016 other statutory notices were issued from time to time. At this stage, we may herein observe that the aforesaid report of the A.O is absolutely vague and is not specific on the aspect, i.e. as to whether or not any notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act was issued by the A.O prior to framing of the assessment vide his order passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated 26.12.2016. 11. During the course of hearing of the appeal, the Ld. AR had submitted that though the assessee had assailed the validity of the jurisdiction that was assumed by the A.O for framing of the impugned a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....TR 325(SC), issuance of notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act forms the very foundation for framing of a valid assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act. Although, we are principally in agreement with the aforesaid contention of the Ld. AR, but at the same time cannot remain oblivion of the fact that adjudication of his claim would require verification of the correct factual position, i.e. as to whether or not any notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act was issued by the A.O prior to framing of the assessment. Considering the fact that the veracity of the aforesaid claim of the assessee, i.e. framing of the assessment dehors issuance of a notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act is required to be verified and cannot be summarily accepted on the very face of it; coupled with th....