TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (6) TMI 1393
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion of Rs. 75,00,000/- on account of capital gains claimed as exempt u/s. 47(1) of the Income Tax Act 1961, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and rejection of assessee's claim of deduction u/s. 54/s54F of the Act. The assessee vide application dated 29.05.2023 has raised an additional ground of appeal challenging validity of order dated 21.03.2014 passed u/s. 263 of the Act. The additional ground raised by the assessee, reads as under: "That the impugned assessment so framed in pursuance to order passed by PCIT us 263 of the Act is bad in law and on facts, in as much as, the order so passed us 263 of the Act was on deceased/ dead person and also without satisfying the statutory preconditions envisaged in the Act, as such,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eved by the order of CIT passed u/s. 263 of the Act, should have assailed the said order before the Tribunal, as the order passed u/s 263 is an appealable order. Since, the assessee accepted the said order it has attainted finality. The AO has passed the assessment order in compliance of the order passed u/s.263 of the Act, which was not appealed by the assessee. Now, the assessee in subsequent proceedings u/s. 143(3) r.w.s 263 of the Act, cannot raise additional ground assailing validity of order passed u/s. 263 of the Act. He further stated that the additional ground raised by the assessee is a mixed question of fact and law which requires fresh examination of facts. Hence, the additional ground should not be admitted. 5. Rebutting the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f Rs. 75,00,000/- received by the assessee and the name of person from whom said amount was received. The AO after considering the detailed submissions of the assessee made no addition with regard to Rs. 75,00,000/- received by the assessee. It is not a case where the AO had not made inquiries. The AO did make inquiry regarding receipt of Rs. 75,00,000/- by the assessee during the relevant period. After having examined the details furnished by the assessee, the Assessing Officer was satisfied that no addition in respect of Rs. 75,00,000/- is warranted, hence, accepted the returned income. Nevertheless, the assessee had made detailed submissions before the CIT in proceeding u/s. 263 of the Act. It was explained to the CIT that the assessee h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ard the submissions made by rival sides and have examined the orders of authorities below. The assessee has raised an additional ground of appeal challenging validity of the order passed u/s 263 of the Act, on the ground that the said order has been passed in the name of a dead person. The Department has objected to admission of additional ground at this belated stage. It is an admitted position that the order passed u/s 263 of the Act dated 21.03.2014 was not challenged by the assessee. The AO framed the assessment on the basis of said order. It is in the proceedings arising from assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act, the assessee has raised an additional ground of appeal challenging validity of the order passed u/s. 263 of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....thering documents. However, in the letter dated 20.03.2014 it was expressly mentioned that Nirmal Kant Saini expired on 21.01.2013 and his death certificate was also placed on record. The CIT has taken cognizance of the said letter and in para 2 of the order passed u/s. 263 of the Act dated 21.03.2014 has recorded this fact. The relevant extract of the said order is reproduced here in under: 2". The case was posted for hearing u/s. 263 of IT Act on 20.03.2014, wherein Sh. Rakesh Malhotra, authorized representative attended and filed reply. In his reply assessee has stated as under that the assessee Sh. Nirmal Kant Saini had expired on 21.01.2013 ...............". Thus, from the reading of the above observations by the CIT, it is....