2025 (8) TMI 1190

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... for the petitioner and learned Senior Standing Counsel Ms. Maithili Mehta for the respondent. 2. Present petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India assails the validity of notice dated 30.03.2021 issued under Sec. 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') with regard to the Assessment Year 2013-14 issued by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1) (1) (hereinafter referred to as 'the respondent' for short). 3. The facts giving rise to filing of this writ petition are as under: 3.1 The petitioner is a Company engaged in the activity of property development. During the Assessment Year 2013-14, the petitioner had acquired "Development Rights" in relation to certain pieces of land on 04.06.2012. The "Development ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Sec. 148 of the Act dated 30.03.2021. 4. Mr. Tushar Hemani, learned Senior Counsel appearing with learned advocate Ms. Vaibhavi Parikh, submitted that the reopening is beyond a period of four years and there is full disclosure of all material facts relevant for assessment on part of the petitioner and therefore, allegations of failure to disclose truly and fully all relevant facts on part of the petitioner cannot be made. Further, it was submitted that the reopening is based on mere change of opinion. The case of the petitioner was selected for scrutiny and the issues in hand were threadbare examined at original assessment stage by the Assessing Officer which is evident from the Assessment Order dated 22.03.2016 as well as the Appellate O....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....On perusal of records, it was noticed that the assessee had purchased development rights at Village Kochariya from M/s Kesar Buildcon and others for Rs. 32,71,43,200 + Stamp duty 32,11,600/- later on during the year i.e. on 30.07.2012 the same was transferred to M/s Unique Mercantile India Pvt. Ltd. (UMPIL) vied MoU no. 2066 dated 30.07.12 for Rs. 32,71,43,200 in Phase 1. On further perusal of records, it is found that 1. The assessee had claimed expenditure of Rs. 29,72,000/- in P & L account and the same was also deducted while calculating the profit earned thus it resulted in double deduction. 2. While calculating the profit earned by assessee in Phase-1 cost of acquisition amounting to Rs.32,71,43,200/- was deducted from the amount ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....reopening the assessment u/s 147 for the A.Y 2013/14 in order to thing to tax the income income which which has escaped assessment as above. It is pertinent to mention here that in this case, an assessment was made as stipulated u/s 2(40) of the Act. However as discussed in reason to believe in this case income chargeable to tax has been under assessed. Looking to the facts and circumstances, I have reason to believe that the income chargeable to tax of Rs. 33,01,15,200/-has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for asstt. Year 2013-14." There were categorical objections on behalf of the petitioner which are as under: "7. It is therefore submitted that the issue of claim of expenditure of Rs. ....