TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (4) TMI 802
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nnai for the assessment year 2013-14 u/s. 147 r.ws. 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the 'Act') vide order dated 11.01.2023. 2. The first issue in this appeal of assessee is as regards to the order of AO i.e., Income Tax Officer, International Taxation, Ward 1(1), Chennai assuming jurisdiction u/s. 147 of the Act for reopening of assessment without sanction of law and reopening as bad in law. For this, assessee has raised the following ground Nos. 8 to 10:- 8. The ITO, Int. Taxn Ward 1(1), Chennai / DRP failed to appreciate that the assumption of jurisdiction u/s 147 of the Act was without sanction of law and ought to have appreciated that the consequential re-assessment order accordingly should be reckoned as b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Act was issued and assessment was reopened. The AO passed draft assessment order u/s. 144C r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated 21.03.2022 wherein, he noted that the assessee should have admitted the value as per guideline value provided in TNREGINET as per Section 50C of the Act. Hence, accordingly he added additional income on account of capital gains u/s. 50C of the Act to the extent of Rs. 29.20 lakhs. Aggrieved against draft assessment order, assessee moved to Dispute Resolution Panel. The assessee raised objection before DRP for issuance of notice u/s. 148 of the Act and DRP vide order dated 14.12.2022 upheld the action of the AO in reopening of assessment u/s. 147 of the Act and approved the draft order of AO. For this, the DRP recorded as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2.2 Thus, based on the above, the Panel finds no infirmity in the action of the AO and hence the objection of the assessee is rejected. Aggrieved, now assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 4. Before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee Shri Arjun Raj, Advocate appeared and drew our attention to assessee's paper-book consisting of 24 pages. The ld.counsel for the assessee first of all drew our attention to page 1 of screenshot of notice claimed to have been issued u/s. 148 of the Act dated 19.03.2021 by the Revenue as reflecting in ITBA portal. He drew our attention to page 1 but stated that there is no notice available in the above portal as an attachment. The ld.counsel then took us through the notice issued by the AO dated....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... notice either on 19.03.2021 or 13.04.2021 are covered by new regime of taxation for reopening of assessment u/s. 148 of the Act. The ld.counsel stated that this issue is no res-integra now because the CBDT in its instruction i.e., Instruction No.1/2022 [F.No.279/Misc/M-51/2022-ITJ] has issued clarification for implementation of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs. Ashish Agarwal reported in [2022] 138 taxmann.com 64. The ld.counsel for the assessee stated that the issue before Hon'ble Supreme Court was of extended re-assessment notice extended in term of Notification No.20/2021/F.No.370142/35/2020-TPL dated 31.03.2021. He stated that there is no quarrel over the notification issued by CBDT but CBDT in its sub....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts to or is likely to amount to fifty lakh rupees or more for that year. Further, the ld.counsel also drew our attention to para 7.1 of aforesaid instruction and the relevant reads as under:- "7.1 Hon'ble Supreme Court has directed that information and material is required to be provided in all cases within 30 days. However, it has also been noticed that notices cannot be issued in a case for AY 2013-14, AY 2014-15 and AY 2015-16, if the income escaping assessment, in that case for that year, amounts to or is likely to amount to less than fifty lakh rupees. Hence, in order to reduce the compliance burden of assessees, it is clarified that information and material may not be provided in a case for AY 2013- 14, AY 2014-15 and AY 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mit for the issuance of notice u/s148 was extended upto 30.04.2021. Since it was showing in the ITBA as pending once again a notice u/s 148 was issued on 13.04.2021 in the same DIN No.1031619292 4 Assessee filed ROI 05.05.2021 Apart from this, he could not contest the issue or could not controvert the later instruction issued by CBDT clarifying the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Agarwal, supra for implementation by lower authorities. 6. We have heard rival contentions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. We noted that admittedly the notice issued u/s. 148 of the Act either on 19.03.2021 or 13.04.2021, whether these are issued on 19.03.2021 i.e., extended, that falls in exten....