2023 (8) TMI 1515

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s a Non-Resident Indian settled in Germany since her marriage in 1994. Assessee claims that prior to assessment year 2016-17 the assessee was not having any taxable income in India and therefore, was not liable to file her income tax return u/s 139 of the Income Tax Act. As for the present assessment year 2015-16 also her income in India comprised of interest income amounting to Rs. 968/- only which was much below the minimum income liable to tax in India therefore, she claims that she was not liable to file any Income Tax Return in India. 2.1 The background of the issue is that the assessee purchased a property bearing no. A-103, Sector 15 Gurgaon Haryana-122200 from Unitech Ltd. for a total sale consideration of Rs. 6,58,96,000/- out of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....refer page no. 5 of the paper book) 2.3 It is further submitted by referring to page no. 4 & 5 of the paper book, that there is a mistake of date of 15th instead of 12th on the confirmation of loan of Mr. Munish Bhatia but the transaction number of RTGS as mentioned in the confirmation is same i.e. JKAH14132025 as mentioned in the bank statement of M/s. Ace Engineering Infratech (India) Pvt. Ltd. Further, even the cheque number of the aforesaid RTGS transaction is same 56737. (page no. 5 & 7 of the paper book). 3. Ld. DRP has taken into consideration the remand report wherein the statement of M/s. Ace Engineering Infratech (India) Pvt. Ltd. was alleged to be without evidence and ld. DRP observed in para 4.1.4 as follows:- "4.1.4 The Pan....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....al, invalid and void-ab- initio. 2. The notice stated to be issued u/s 148 on 31-03-2021 pertaining to Assessment Year 2015-2016 is not as per the procedure laid down by well-established principles of law denying natural justice to the assessee. 3. The Ld. Assessing Officer while issuing/serving notice dated 31.03.2021 u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act has not complied with the procedure laid down under Chapter XIV of the Act making the reassessment proceedings illegal, invalid, & void-ab-initio. 4. Without prejudice to the above the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in law and on facts in adding a sum of Rs. 74,12,618/- u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act alleging that the sources of loan of Rs. 74,12,618/- out of the total loan amount of Rs. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Hon'ble DRP by treating the 3rd transaction of loan of Rs. 74,12,618/given on 12-04-2014 by M/S Ace Engineering Infratech (I) Pvt Ltd treating it as unexplained investment u/s 69 of the Act, while accepting the other two transactions of loan (i) Rs. 60,00,000/- and (ii) Rs. 50,00,000/- entered one day before on 11-04-2014 which is arbitrary, unjustified, illegal, and bad in law. 8. The Ld. Assessing Officer erred in law and on facts in initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(C) & 271 F of the Income Tax Act. 9. That the above grounds of appeal are without prejudice to one another. 10. That the appellant prays for the liberty to raise, such further grounds of appeal arising from the facts of the case, as may enable the appel....