TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (3) TMI 1283
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ner's case that notice issued under Section 148A (b) of the Act does not set out any information that is suggestive of petitioner's income escaping assessment. Thus, the reassessment proceedings initiated are wholly without jurisdiction. 3. The Assessing Officer [AO] had issued the aforementioned notice under Section 148A (b) of the Act setting out certain information which, according to the AO was suggestive of the petitioner's income escaping assessment. The plain reading of the said notice indicates that it is premised on the investigation carried out by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI). SEBI (CIEB) had sent a letter dated 28.07.2022 sharing certain information, which related to company named Jalan Cement Works Limited [now known as Aashrit Capital Limited - hereafter ACL]. The said information is to the effect that ACL and its related parties had entered into the non-genuine transactions and misused the funds/accounts of the company. According to the AO, the said communication indicated that ACL had resorted to misrepresentation of accounts and had failed to present a true and fair view of the state of affairs of the said company. 4. The AO noted that the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eting Associates Pvt. Ltd. for General Agreement wherein no detail of second party is mentioned and similar situation is in transaction dated 30.03.2016 wherein Stamp Paper dated 11.03.2016 5.18 PM was used. For sale transaction dated 31.03.2016, Stamp Paper dated 30.12.2015 12:00 PM was used by M/s. Gyan Marketing Associates Pvt. Ltd. wherein no details of Second Party was mentioned and Stamp Paper was for general agreement. It is also noticed that ACL has purchased immovable properties i.e Space at Cyberwalk @ 6000 per sq. ft." 5. A close examination of the above information indicates that the AO had found that the petitioner had purchased certain space in a real estate project named Cyberwalk from ACL and also entered into the transaction to sell space at the said building. It is noted that the petitioner had sold space admeasuring 1600 square feet at a value of Rs. 96,00,000/-, however, no tax had been deducted from the transaction and the value of said transaction has been split to avoid Tax Deducted at Source (TDS). 6. The second allegation made is regarding the availing of loan of Rs. 75,00,000/- from Hanurang Vinimay Private Limited [HVPL], which according to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eet of space in one of the towers of Cyberwalk from ACL at the rate of Rs. 6,000/- per square feet and part consideration of Rs. 11,28,000/- was paid through banking channels. The petitioner also deposited the TDS of Rs. 72,000/-. The balance consideration of Rs. 60,00,000/- was not paid in cash or through banking channels but was reflected by the petitioner as outstanding and payable to ACL. The said amount was paid in the following financial year (on 15.07.2017) along with interest at the rate of 9.5 per cent per annum. 10. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the space purchased from ACL was not in the same tower of Cyberwalk as the space purchased from Ms Madhu Soni (a part of which was sold to ACL). 11. In so far as unsecured loan of Rs. 75,00,000/- from HVPL is concerned the petitioner had explained that HVPL was a Non-Banking Finance Company (NBFC) registered with the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and also provided certain details regarding the said company as is evident from paragraph no.29 of the reply furnished by the assessee to the notice under Section 148A (b) of the Act, which is set out below:- "29. In this connection we very humbly submit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d not give any disproportionate gain nor created any unfair advantage to the appellants in that case (ACL and other related entities) nor any specific loss was caused to the investors. Accordingly, the penalty imposed was reduced. 14. It is apparent from the impugned order and impugned notice that the order of the SAT dated 17.11.2022 has not been considered. 15. The principal question that requires to be addressed is whether there is any ground to believe that the assessee's income escaped assessment. The transaction of immovable properties, as explained by the assessee had resulted in a profit of Rs. 60,00,000/- during the previous year relevant to the AY 2016-17. Thus, the transaction of sale of 1600 square feet space to ACL cannot be stated to have resulted in any income of the assessee escaping assessment. In any view the impugned order does not indicate as to how any income of the assessee had escaped assessment on account of the said transaction. The observation that no TDS was deducted on the said transaction, may not be material to reopen the assessment of the assessee. Apart from the fact that the petitioner disputes that any TDS was required to be deducted, the obl....