TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (6) TMI 728
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts of the case. 2. On the facts and circumstances the CIT (A), NFAC has erred in allowing the appeal in favour of assessee stating that the issue of deeming provisions u/s 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act does not find any place in the assessment order and there cannot be any rectification to the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act on the debatable issue or where there is change of opinion. 3. On the facts and circumstances the CIT(A) did not properly evaluate the nature of the transaction and the genuineness of the claim of exemption made by the assessee u/s 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act. 4. The CIT(A) erred in not considering the relevant judicial precedents and applicable provisions of the Income Tax Act in determ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., the appellant has made the following submission - The proposed notice to rectify the assessment u/s 154 is with reference to application of Sec. 56 (2)(vii)(b). This section in its proviso refers to the provisions of Sec. 50C of the income tax Act & also specifies that the provisions of Section 50C are applicable in similar fashion to sec. 56(2)(vii)(b) of the income tax Act, in as much as the referring the matter to valuation officer. The relevant provisions reads as under - "Provided that where the stamp duty value of immovable property as referred to in sub clause (b) is disputed by the assessee on grounds mentioned in sub- section (2) of section 50C , the assessing officer may refer the valuation of such property to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... returned income. Invocation of provisions of Sec. 154 does not give jurisdiction to the assessing officer to amend the assessment order merely on the change of opinion. On this ground also order passed u/s 154 is not sustainable in the eyes of law & the same be cancelled. 7. This case was first assessed u/s 143(3) of the Act which was selected for limited scrutiny for verification of investments made in agricultural lands i.e. immovable properties. During the course assessment proceedings, the AO has made enquiries on the issue and thereafter accepted the returned income of the assessee. The AO further found that there is variation in the sale of consideration and the stamp duty valuation of the immovable properties purchased. Acc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4 of the Act which was not at all discussed in the assessment order. The issue of stamp valuation is debatable one. Similarly, there is change of opinion on the issue of invoking provisions of section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act. There cannot be any rectification to the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act on the debatable issue or where there is change of opinion. Thus, the AO's action cannot be upheld and therefore, the order u/s 154 passed by the AO is hereby quashed." 5. It is against this order dated 05.07.2023 passed by LD CIT(A)/NFAC the Revenue is in appeal before us. 6. Learned Sr. DR vehemently supported the order passed by the AO & requested to set-a-side the order passed by LD CIT(A)/NFAC. 7. On the other hand, LD....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... vs. CIT, 73 ITR 283 (Bombay). (iv) CIT vs. S. S. Gupta, 257 ITR 440 (Rajasthan). 8. We have heard learned counsels from both the sides & perused the material available on record. We find that the case of the respondent assessee was selected for limited scrutiny for verification of investments made in agricultural lands i.e. movable properties. After detailed scrutiny an assessment order u/s 143(3) of the IT Act was passed accepting the returned income. Later the case was reopened u/s 154 of the IT Act for applying the provisions of section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the IT Act on the transaction of purchase of immovable property by the assessee, as the stamp duty value for the purposes of registration was more than the value of actual co....