TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (10) TMI 1688
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....endent investigation/enquiry by the AO, lacking satisfaction, the notice issued u/s.148 and the reassessment framed thereafter are all contrary to the provision of law and be quashed. 3. Because there being no material to form reason to believe that income has escaped assessment, the reassessment framed under section 147 read with section 144B is bad in law void ab initio and be quashed. 4. Because there being no approval as mandated as per section 151, from the Chief Commissioner of Income-tax, the notice issued under section 148 is without jurisdiction, the reassessment framed be quashed. 5. Because the CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in upholding the addition of Rs. 2,14,22,053/- u/s 56(2)(vii) of the Act, on account of difference between the stamp value and the actual consideration paid, on account of purchase of property, on account the addition being contrary to the provisions of law the same be deleted. 6. Because the CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law overlooking that there being first a verbal agreement on 10/03/2011 and thereafter a - registered agreement executed on 03/07/2012 to purchase the property, which having being acted u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... value as adopted in respect of the part property sold, such addition being contrary to facts bad in law be deleted. 10. Because no consequential or parallel action of treating the difference between the actual consideration paid and received, in the hands of the seller, the AO was not justified in treating the difference in the hands of the assessee as income, the CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in upholding the addition made by the AO, the same be deleted. 11. Because on a proper consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and on interpretation of the provisions of the Act, the addition made by the AO and upheld by the CIT(A) applying the provisions of section 56(2)(vii)(b) and 50C, is not maintainable both on facts and in law, the same be delete. 12. Because in any case and all circumstances the additions made by the AO and upheld by the CIT(A), be deleted. 13. Because on a proper appraisal of the facts of the case, the order passed by the AO and upheld by the CIT(A) is all against the principles of natural justice and be quashed." 3. In this case, the assessee had filed the return of income on 30/09/2014, showing total in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h and his wife Mrs. Anita Singh purchased property below its stamp valuation during the previous year 2013-14. The case was reopened the case under section 147, for undisclosed income. Mr. Nirmal Singh declared an income of Rs. 7,81,320/-, which the department found inconsistent with the property transaction details. The property was purchased for Rs. 2,19,40,000/- against a stamp valuation of Rs. 4,82,74,000/-. A part was later sold for Rs. 40 Lakh. Sections 56(2)(vii) and 50C of the Income Tax Act are deemed applicable to this transaction. The case was reassessed under section 147, and a notice under section 148 was issued. The reassessment led to an addition of Rs. 2,14,22,053/- under section 56(2)(vii) and Rs. 49,11,947/- under section 50C, treated as escaped income. The reassessment, being a result of what the AO considers concealed particulars of income, led to the initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The assessee submitted a response to the show cause, citing various judicial decisions in support of its claims. The assessee requested a personal hearing through video conferencing, which the department scheduled but the assessee failed to atten....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... provisions of Section 56(2)(vii) should be considered based on the actual amount received. In this case, the appellant is relying on Section 56(2)(vii) and the actual amount received, but has not submitted documents supporting this claim during the appeal proceedings. In view of the above discussion, the ground taken by the assessee is dismissed." 4. Aggrieved again, the assessee filed an appeal in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). In the course of appellate proceedings in ITAT, the assessee filed paper book in three parts containing the following particulars: - S. No. Particulars Schedule 01. Copy of Ikrarnama dated 28.05.2011 A 02. Copy of Sale Agreement executed on 03.07.2012 between Nirmal Singh & Anita Singh (Purchasers) and Sardar Gurvinder Pal Singh (Seller) defining payment made (pages 10 to 28) and terms of future payments (pages 29 onwards). B 03. Copy of Sale Deed executed on 27.06.2013, in pursuance of the Agreement to Sell. C 04. Copy of Sale Deed executed on 28.06.2013 between Nirmal Singh & Anita Singh (Sellers) and Sunil Kumar Mishra (Purchaser). D 05. Details of payments made for purchase of property. E ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h Garg, Learned Counsel; and Revenue was represented by Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Sr. Departmental Representative. Both sides filed written submissions. The relevant portion of the written submission filed from the assessee's side is reproduced as under: - "Proceedings u/s.148 initiated are not valid - Reasons: (i) The reasons as recorded are factually incorrect. (ii) The reasons as recorded do not contain the material on the basis of which such reasons have been formulated. (iii) It is the case of borrowed satisfaction. (iv) No application or appreciation or analysis of facts. (v) No independent inquiry by the AO prior to issue of notice u/s.148. (b) The Approval given by the competent authority is mechanical. Giving approval on the basis of wrong facts and incorrect quote of section. (c) The Assessment framed is without jurisdiction. No notice has been issued u/s.143(2) by the NFAC. The sec. 144B is mandatory. Notice ought to have been issued by NFAC. In absence of notice the NFAC does not assume jurisdiction. No notice u/s.143(2) can be issued prior to disposal of objections. (d) Non disposal of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the competent Accordingly, a notice under section 148 of the Act was issued and served digitally to the assessee on 30.03.2021 requesting the assessee to deliver his ITR within 30 days of receipt of the notice. The assessee has filed ITR in response to the notice u/s 148 of the Act on 22.04.2021 declaring income of Rs. 7,81,320/- same as declared in original return income of filed. The notice us 143(2) was issued on 27.10 2021.....Thereafter, the case was assigned to the National Faceless Assessment Centre(NFAC) on 11.11.2021 under the Faceless Assessment Scheme, 2019....." The objection of the Ld. A R on the issue of notice u s 143(2) by the successor i.e. AO NeFAC is also not valid in view of the Le: al Provisions of Section 129 & Section 292 BB which are being reproduced hereunder: Change of incumbent of an office 129 "Whenever in respect of any proceeding under this Act an income-tax authorities ceases to exercise jurisdiction and is succeeded by another who has and exercise jurisdiction the income tax authority so succeeding may continue from the stage at which the proceeding was left by his predecessor...." Notice deemed to be valid in cer....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....2,63,34,000 minus Rs. 49,11,947) is treated as escaped income within the provision of sec.56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act and added back to the total income under the head income from other sources........... .......9. The assessee in response to the show cause has submitted his reply dt. 29.03.2022 placing his stand on the additions proposed in the show cause and quoted various judicial decisions in support of his claim. Further the assessee requested for a personal hearing through video conferencing for oral submission of information... ... The reply submitted by the assessee in response to the show cause is perused and found to be not tenable as the assessee was required to provide the details of Stamp Value of the property as per the stamp valuation authority for the agreement done on 03/07/2012 during the F.Y. 2012-13, however the assessee has failed to submit those details, Further, the assessee was given a opportunity of personal hearing through video conferencing for presenting his stand and oral submission of information as per the request made by him However, the assessee failed to attend the Video Conference scheduled on 30/03/2022 at 3.15 P.M. There....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessed income, including additions, is determined to be Rs. 2,71,15,320/-. 4.4. As regards first ground is concerned that during the appeal proceedings, the appellant has claimed the purchase of Kartar Talkies as being acquired through a "slump sale". The contention mentioned in appeal but this claim was not disputed before the Assessing Officer (AO). It implies that, during the assessment process, there was no disagreement or challenge to the appellant's assertion regarding the nature of the purchase. However, the statement is not substantiated as, no evidence supporting the slump sale claim has been submitted during the appeal proceedings. This lack of evidence is challenging because it is necessary to substantiate such claims, especially if they have significant implications for income tax. it's crucial to provide proper documentation and evidence to support any such claim made. The absence of evidence to support the slump sale claim during the appeal proceedings has weaken the case of the assessee. The appellant has failed to give evidence regarding the fact that the sale of Kartar Talkies was a slump sale and the value of such assets in the books of seller. T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ose details..." 3. In view of the above, it is humbly requested that, in the interest of justice, the judicious verdicts of Ld. CIT (Appeal) in the above cases may kindly be upheld. However, in the esteemed opinion of Hon'ble Bench, if any fact has been left to be verified by the AO or Ld. CIT (A), the matter can be restored back to the respective authority for verification of facts in the interest of justice." 7. At the time of hearing before us, the Learned Counsel for the Assessee placed reliance on the aforesaid written submissions and paper books. He placed special reliance on order of the Delhi Bench of ITAT, in the case of ITO Vs. M/s. Aditya Narain Verma (HUF) (Vide order dated 07/06/2017 in ITA. No.4166/Del/2013 for AY. 2009-10). He also placed reliance on brief synopsis (forming part of paper book), the relevant portion of which is reproduced as under: - "(i) The property has been purchased in the joint names of Nirmal Singh and Smt. Anita Singh. (ii) The entire addition has been made in the hands of Nirmal Singh. The agreement to purchase and Sale Deed in in the joint names. (iii) The description of the property in question is in th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Notice u/s.143(2) on 27.10.2021 > Case assigned to NFAC on 11.11.2022 > Copy of order dated 29.03.2022 disposing off the objections is attached. Objections to the proceedings initiated u/s.148 filed on 13.09.2021. - Not disposed off within reasonable time but disposed off on 29.03.2022, a day before the passing of the final Assessment Order. Not permitted - (i) GKN Driveshaft (India)Ltd. vs. CIT 259 ITR 19 (SC) (attached) (ii) Bharat Jayantilal Patel vs. UOI - 378 ITR 596 (Bombay) (attached) > Response filed to Notices as issued u/s.142(1) from time to time. > No Notice u/s.143(2) issued by NFAC as required as per section 144B(1) of the Act. > Issue of Notice u/s.143(2) by NFAC is sine qua non. Any assessment framed without issue of notice u/s.143(2) by NFAC, makes the order passed by NFAC (c) and without jurisdiction. > The reason for this, itself has been laid down in the procedure for Faceless Assessment (copy attached). It states as to how an assessee would come to know that his case has been picked up for faceless e-assessment. The answer to the same is that an assessee shall receive notice u/s.143(2) of the Act di....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fficer that the value adopted or assessed or assessable Stamp Valuation Authority exceeds the fair market value of the property as on the date of transfer. It is also not in dispute that the Assessing Officer failed to make reference to Valuation Officer, as mandated by the aforementioned provisions of law. In this regard, we find that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by order of Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT Delhi in the case of ITO Vs. M/s. Aditya Narain Verma (HUF) (supra). In this case, the request of the Departmental Representative that the matter may be set aside to the file of the Assessing Officer for referring the case to Valuation Officer, was rejected. The relevant portion of the order is reproduced as under: - "4.1 On the very perusal of the provisions laid down under section 50C of the Act reproduced hereinabove, we fully concur with the finding of the ld. CIT (Appeals) that when the assessee in the present case had - claimed before Assessing Officer that the value adopted or assessed by the stamp valuation authority under sub section (1) exceeds the fair market value of the property as on the date of transfer, the Assessing Officer should h....