2024 (2) TMI 149

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d ab initio & deserve to be quashed. 2. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) II erred in confirming action of Assessing Officer II for reopening the assessment under Section 148 on the ground of escapement of income when the subject matter is a matter which was fully disclosed in return of income filed and partly allowed in the original assessment order dated 25.02.2014 passed by Assessing Officer I and further relief for the said matter granted by Commissioner (Appeals) I. 3. The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) II has erred in not examining validity and maintainability of Notice under Section 148 of the Act issued by the Assessing Officer II as well as Assessment Order dated 23.12.2016 under Section 143(3) read with section 147 passed by said....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ultural land on 23..11.2010 and the capital gain arising for the assessee, HUF, was reported in the original return of income at Rs. 28,76,181/-. The assessee had acclaimed deduction under Section 54 of the Act in view of the investment of sale proceeds in the new house property. However, the assessee, HUF, had purchased new house property in the individual capacity i.e. Mandar Kulkarni. Therefore, the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that the assessee, HUF, had not fulfilled a vital condition for the purchase of new property to be eligible for claiming deduction under Section 54 of the Act i.e. the new property should have been purchased and registered in the name of assessee, HUF, and not in the name or individual. The deduction cl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tter was travelled upto CIT(A). The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee has sold residential house and made investment in new residential house within the stipulated time period provided under Section 54 of the Act. The said investment in new residential house was made in the name of Mandar Kulkarni in his personal capacity (individual) as he is Member of HUF. Assessee's Bank was not approving home loan in the name of HUF on account of certain internal guidelines. Original assessment was completed under Section 143(3) of the Act and the same was challenged before the CIT(A). Oder of the CIT(A) dated 03.08.2015 was not challenged by the assessee as well as by the Department at any point of time. Thus, the Ld. AR submitted that the reopening o....