TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (11) TMI 1273
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iled its return of income electronically on 02.07.2017 declaring income of Rs. 1,54,420/-. Return was selected for limited scrutiny under CASS with the following reasons: (i) investment in immovable property; (ii) deduction/exemption from capital gains; and (iii) capital gains/loss on sale of property. 5. Statutory notices were issued and served upon the assessee and assessment was completed on an assessed income of Rs. 19,14,920/- after making an addition of Rs. 17,60,500/-. 6. Assuming jurisdiction conferred upon him by provisions of section 263 of the Act, the PCIT, Faridabad served a notice and after receiving the reply to the queries raised by the PCIT, directed the Assessing Officer to examine issue of taxation of capital gains arising from sale of land and availing exemption u/s 54B of the Act on purchase of land. 7. The Assessing Officer was further directed to enquire, examine, verify and investigate all the issues relating to the claim of exemption/deduction u/s 54B and 54F of the Act and directed the Assessing Officer to pass a fresh assessment order and recompute the income of the assessee after making enquiries as ment....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....7.07.2019 with the following query: "You are requested to file the complete reply with supporting documents etc as per Questionnaire by 22.07.19 failing which action will be taken as per law." 13. Third notice was issued on 16.10.2019 with the following question: "please refer to your last submission whereby you have just uploaded a few copies of sale/purchase of property, in this regard you are requested to kindly file your point wise reply as per questionnaire with complete details." 14. Fourth notice was issued on 06.11.2019 with the following question: "please refer to your last reply, you have not furnished the details regarding Investment made nor furnished the copies of deeds of purchases made, so, in this regard you are requested to categorically mention in your reply the details of sale of properties, amount, date of sale/purchase, area of land and amount of consideration also for the properties purchased along with copies of deeds and payment details date wise with complete narration." 15. Fifth notice was issued on 24.12.2019 with the following question: "please refer to your last reply kindly explain the purpose and basis for....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....come Tax Act, 1961 Ref. No. : ITBA/AST/F/142(1)/2019-20/1019854836(1) dated 06-11- 2019 Respected Sir, With reference to above captioned subject matter, I submit as under: 1. That I had sold agriculture lands during the FY 2016-17, details of sale consideration are as under: Copies of Sale deeds are already submitted for your reference. 2. hat I had claimed transfer expenses of Rs. 17,71,000/-on said sale transaction, documentary evidence is enclosed herewith as 'Annexure-1'. 3. That I had sold my agriculture land during the FY 2016-17. That out of total sale consideration of Rs. 17,77,40,000/-, I had received Rs. 3,82,37,600/- in FY 2016- 17 and remaining amount received as PDC Cheque dated 30/07/2018 of Rs. 13,77,25,000/- which was encashed in FY 2018-19. 4. That I had invested Rs. 15,09,24,500/- in agriculture land on the basis of PDC Cheque as payment was received in FY 2018-19. 5. That statement showing summary of exemption claimed under section 54F and 54B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is enclosed herewith as 'Annexure-2'. 6. That explanation r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ife, submission are as under: That I had made payment to purchase the agriculture land and residential property out of sale consideration received/receivable on sale of agriculture land of Rs. 17,77,40,000/- ii. That out of total investments, some property had been registered in the name of my wife Bishembari Devi. That my wife Smt. Bishembari Devi is depended upon me and she had not claimed any exemption benefit against the said purchases under the income tax. iv. That I had also relied on below judgments: HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN in case of Laxmi Narayan vs Commissioner of Income-tax, JP-II [2018] 89 taxmann.com 334 HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI in case of Commissioner of Income-tax-XII vs Kamal Wahal [2013] 30 taxmann.com 34. HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA in case of Commissioner of Income-tax vs Gurnam Singh [2008] 170 Taxman 160 Copies of Orders are enclosed herewith. (Annexure-3) 4. That affidavit of my wife Smt. Bishembari Devi is enclosed herewith. (Annexure4) In view of above, your honour will find the above in order. Thanking You, (Ra....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rom the law and is, therefore, invalid, and is a defect that is jurisdictional in its nature, and does not refer to the judgment of the Assessing Officer in fixing the amount of valuation of the property. Similarly, "erroneous judgment" means "one rendered according to course and 8 practice of court, but contrary to law, upon mistaken view of law; or upon erroneous application of legal principles". 12. From the aforesaid definitions it is clear that an order cannot be termed as erroneous unless it is not in accordance with law. If an Income-tax Officer acting in accordance with law makes a certain assessment, the same cannot be branded as erroneous by the Commissioner simply because, according to him, the order should have been written more elaborately This section does not visualise a case of substitution of the judgment of the Commissioner for that of the Income-tax Officer, who passed the order unless the decision is held to be erroneous. Cases may be visualised where the Income-tax Officer while making an assessment examines the accounts, makes enquiries, applies his mind to the facts and circumstances of the case and determines the income either by accepting the accounts or by....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....missioner to satisfy him prima facie that the aforesaid two requisites are present. If not, he has no authority to initiate proceedings for revision. Exercise of power of suo motu revision under such circumstances will amount to arbitrary exercise of power. It is well-settled that when exercise of statutory power is dependent upon the existence of certain objective facts, the authority before exercising such power must have materials on record to satisfy it in that regard. If the action of the authority is challenged before the court it would be open to the courts to examine whether the relevant objective factors were available from the records called for and examined by such authority. The Income-tax Officer in this case had made enquiries in regard to the nature of the expenditure incurred by the assessee. The assessee had given detailed explanation in that regard by a letter in writing. All these are part of the record of the case. Evidently, the claim was allowed by the Income-tax Officer on being satisfied with the explanation of the assessee. Such decision of the Income tax Officer cannot be held to be "erroneous" simply because in his order he did not make an elaborate discu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....satisfied about the creditworthiness/capacity of the donors, the source from where these funds have come and also the creditworthiness/ capacity of the donor. Once the Assessing Officer was satisfied with regard to the same, there was no further requirement on the part of the Assessing Officer to disclose his satisfaction in the Assessment Order passed thereon. Thus, this objection on the part of the Revenue cannot be accepted." 26. We find that the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Sunbeam Auto reported in 332 ITR 167 has held as held as under: "12. We have considered the rival submissions of the counsel on the other side and have gone through the records. The first issue that arises for our consideration is about the exercise of power by the CIT under s. 263 of the IT Act. As noted above, the submission of learned counsel for the Revenue was that while passing the assessment order, the AO did not consider this aspect specifically whether the expenditure in question was revenue or capital expenditure. This argument predicates on the assessment order, which apparently does not give any reasons while allowing the entire expenditure as revenue expenditure....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion claimed u/s 54B of the Income Tax Act of Rs. 50,75,000/-(including Stamp duty of Rs. 2,75,000/-) invested in plot in the name of wife is not allowable and is to be disallowed. The assessee has also claimed deduction u/s 54F of the Income Tax Act of Rs. 1,79,00,000/- including renovation expenses of Rs. 85,00,000/- for the house purchased on 15.09.2016 vide sale deed No. 2726 in the name of Smit. Bishamvari Devi wife of the assessee situated at Village Bhondsi Tehsil Sohna registered by Sub-Registrar, Sohna. This deduction is not allowable as the plot/house is not purchased in the name of the assessee and is to be disallowed. Out of the total sale consideration of Rs 3,82,22 600/- received on 30.07.2016 an amount of Rs. 1,35,47,000/- is to be disallowed as the same is a not invested with in a period of two-years from the date of transfer required as per the provisions of section 54B of the Income Tax Act Therefore, wrong deduction claim u/s 54F of Rs. 1,79,00,000/- and excess deduction claimed u/s section 54B of the Income Tax Act of Rs. 1,35.47,000/- is to be disallowed." 28. In his reply dated 14.02.2022, which is placed at pages 199....