2025 (6) TMI 1489

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....operty, being agricultural land, for a consideration of Rs. 4,05,91,000/-. The Petitioner filed the original filed the original return of income on 16.10.2016, declaring total income of Rs. 1,20,450/-. Subsequently, on 31.03.2017, a revised return was filed declaring the same income of Rs. 1,20,450/-, while claiming exemption under Section 54B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter, "the Act") in respect of capital gains purportedly arising from the sale of the said agricultural land. 3.2 The case was selected for limited scrutiny under the provisions of Section 143 (2) of the Act vide notice dated 19.09.2017. The scope of scrutiny was confined, inter alia, to the issue of whether the claim for deduction from capital gains had been made in accordance with law. 3.3 In response, the Petitioner furnished requisite information by letter dated 05.12.2018, including inter alia: * Explanation in relation to deduction under section 54B of the Act from capital gains. * Conveyance deed in relation to sale of agricultural land for Rs. 4,05,91,000/-. 3.4 Further, vide communication dated 15.12.2018, the Petitioner submitted that the land in question did not fall within the definitio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....148 of the Act, along with consequential reliefs: "(a) quash and set aside the impugned notice at ANNEXURE "A" to this petition; (b) pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, to stay the implementation and operation of the notice at ANNEXURE "A" to this petition and stay the further proceedings for the Assessment Year 2016-17; (c) any other and further relief deemed just and proper be granted in the interest of justice; (d) to provide for the cost of this petition." 5. Mr. Tushar Hemani, learned Senior Advocate along with Ms. Vaibhavi K. Parikh, learned Counsel for the Petitioner has submitted that the reasons for reopening are scanty, non-specific and vague. The case of the Petitioner has been sought to be reopened in a mechanical manner with no application of mind and there could be no prima facie "belief" for the escapement of income chargeable to tax. Further, considering the fact that the Petitioner's case was selected for scrutiny and assessed thereafter, the attempt to reopen the case on the same set of facts has to be termed as "change of opinion", which is impermissible in law. 6. On behalf of the Department, Ms. Maithili Mehta, lear....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....any kind held by an assessee, whether or not connected with his business or profession; (b) any securities held by a Foreign Institutional Investor which has invested in such securities in accordance with the regulations made under the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (15 of 1992), but does not include- (i) any stock-in-trade other than the securities referred to in sub-clause (b), consumable stores or raw materials held for the purposes of his business or profession; (ii) personal effects, that is to say, movable property (including wearing apparel and furniture) held for personal use by the assessee or any member of his family dependent on him, but excludes- (a) jewellery; (b) archaeological collections; (c) drawings; (d) paintings; (e) sculptures; or (f) any work of art. Explanation 1. For the purposes of this sub-clause, "jewellery" includes- (a) ornaments made of gold, silver, platinum or any other precious metal or any alloy containing one or more of such precious metals, whether or not containing any precious or semi-precious stone, and whether or not worked or sewn into any wearing apparel; (b) precious or semi-precious st....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....h electronic media (e-file) vide acknowledgement No. 504254491161016 declaring total income at Rs. 1,20,450/- there after assessee had filed revised return of income on 31/03/2017 through electronic media (e-file) vide acknowledgement No. 746804681310317 declaring total income of Rs. 1,20,450/-. The same was processed u/s. 143(1) of the IT Act. The case was selected for Limited scrutiny in CASS with the following reason. 1. Whether sundry creditors are genuine. 2. Whether deduction from capital gains has been claimed correctly. Notice u/s. 143(2) of the IT Act was sent through EProceeding Facility on ITBA on 19/09/2017. Thereafter, Notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act was also sent through EProceeding Facility on ITBA along with questionnaire on 02/11/2018 and 28/11/18. In response to the notices issued, the assessee filed reply through E-Proceeding Facility on ITBA. 2. The assessee having income from Business or Profession and income from other sources. The assessee had submitted the details called for and the same are perused. 3. After considering the information and details submitted through E-Proceeding Facility on ITBA filed by the assessee, the total income is comp....