TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (10) TMI 802
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ence and brevity. ITA No.- 204/Agr/2024: First we take up this appeal for adjudication 2. Brief facts of the case are: The assessee filed her return of income on 17.10.2016, declaring total income of Rs. 33,64,100/-. The assessee is engaged in the business of manufacturing, export and sales against form H of electrical wiring accessories. The case was reopened u/s 147of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') by the AO, vide notice U/s 148 of the Act, dated 30.03.2021, on the ground that the assessee had purchased an immovable property, at a consideration significantly lower than the circle rate, thereby attracting the provision of section 56(2) (viib) of the Act. The AO noted that the actual total consideration for the said property was Rs. 4,71,04,002/-, while the Circle Rate for the same was Rs. 9,01,23,000/- and since the assessee had 1/3rd share in the property, the consideration paid by the Assessee was Rs. 1,57,01,334/- as per the submission of the Assessee to NFAC dated 04.02.2022. Out of this amount Rs. 1,54,08,935/- was paid to the seller by the Assessee through cheque and the remaining amount of Rs. 2,92,399/- was deposited as TDS. The Assessee further requested for v....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e was no good reason for holding the curative amendment to be only as prospective in effect. c) That the intention of the legislature was never to cause any hardship to the genuine taxpayers due to minuscule variation in the consideration vis-à-vis the SDV Legislature was compassionate to cure the shortcomings & obviate unintended hardships. d) That it is well settled that a curative amendment to avoid unintended consequences is to be treated as retrospective even though it may not state so, the insertion of third proviso must be given retrospective effect from the time when the related legal provision was introduced. e) That with respect to the retrospective application of enhanced tolerance band to 10%. it was ruled that there was no particular reason to justify any particular time frame for implementing the enhancement of tolerance band. There was no difference in genuine hardships due to bonafide factors, it was much valid then as it is now. Therefore, the enhanced tolerance band of 10% was held to retrospective in effect w.e.f. 1" April. 2003. 11. That in the case of Chandra Prakash Jhunjhujhunwala Vs. DCIT ITA No. 2351/Kol/2017 it ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to section 50C of the Act and CBDT Circular no. 8/2018 in line with pronouncements of various Courts and Tribunals, which held that when the margin between the actual consideration and the value ascertained by Departmental valuer was less than 10%, noted that the said difference is liable to be ignored, for the purpose of Assessment. 2.4 Accordingly, the AO completed the assessment at total income of Rs. 33,64, 100/- as declared by the assessee. 3. Thereafter, the case was examined by the Ld. PCIT, Agra under the provision of section 263 of the Act. The Ld. PCIT issued show-cause dated 18.12.2024, by observing that Circular no. 8/2018 CBDT stated that the amendments to Section 50C takes effect from 1st April 2019 and will accordingly apply in relation to A.Y. 2019-20 and subsequent years and will not apply for A.Y. 2016-17 as was the case of the present assessee, and therefore, the difference of Rs. 15,14,399/- should have been added by the AO, which was not done by the AO. Accordingly, the Ld. PCIT show caused the assessee to explain as to why, in view of these facts the assessment order passed in this case should not be treated as erroneous in so far as it was prejudicial t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2011-12 dated 15.01.2021 and of ITAT Kolkata Bench in the case of Chandra Prakash Jhunjhunawala vs. DCIT, ITA No.- 2351/Kol/2017, wherein it has been held that the amendment to section 50C has to be retrospective in nature and considered to be applicable since the insertion of section 50C of the Act. The Ld. AR reproduced the relevant part of the as under: "Accordingly. we hold that the insertion of third proviso to Section 50C is declaratory & curative in nature. The third proviso to Section 50C relates to computation of value of property as explained by us above, hence it is not a substantive amendment, it is only a procedural amendment therefore the Coordinate Benches of the ITAT used to ignore the variation upto 10%, therefore, the said amendment should be retrospective. Therefore, even when the statute does not specifically state so, such amendments, in the light of the detailed discussions can only be treated as retrospective & effective from the date related statutory provisions was introduced. Thus the third proviso to Section 50 C should be treated as curative in nature & with retrospective effect from 1st April 03, the date which Section 50 C was introduced." (Pa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n of Explanation 2 in section 263 of the Act by the Finance Act, 2015, wherein an assessment order passed without making inquiries for verification, which should have been made / conducted by the AO, would also be amendable to exercise of jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act. 5.3 Accordingly, the Ld. PCIT relying upon various case laws as mentioned on page no. 9 to 10 of his order held that the assessment order dated 23.06.2022 passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the I. T. Act, 1961 by the Assessing Officer was erroneous in so far as it was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue and has been issued without making enquiries which should have been made by the AO, as discussed and mentioned in his order and cancelled said assessment order with directions to the Assessing Officer to pass a fresh order, denovo in respect of issue as discussed in para 8 and 9 of his order u/s. 263, after providing due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 6. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee is in appeal before us on the following grounds: ITA No.- 204/Del/2025 "1. That the appellant craves leave to add/alter any of the grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....evision of assessment order is not correct on facts and in law in the case. Hence the revisional order passed by learned PCIT-1, Agra, should be declared as null and void. 6. That the Id. PCIT-1, Agra has mentioned that the appellant was not eligible for the benefit of the amendment which was not available for the year under consideration and therefore the difference between the stamp duty value and sale consideration should have been added in the income of the appellant as per the provisions applicable for the year under consideration on the basis of various court citations which were not applicable to the case of the appellant. Hence the revisional order passed by learned PCIT-1, Agra, should be declared as null and void. 7. That Id. PCIT-1, Agra has mentioned that the case laws cited by the appellant were not applicable to the facts of the case of the appellant as the facts were distinguishable. Failure to make proper enquiries/verification to arrive at the correct and complete facts and to apply the correct law made the assessment order erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interest of revenue as has been held by various courts. These observations are base....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o be erroneous in so far as it was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. In view of these facts, it was submitted that the view of the Ld. PCIT was merely a change of opinion and therefore not supported by judicial precedents and was, therefore, the same was not sustainable and the same may be quashed. 8. The Ld. CIT(DR) relied upon the order u/s 263 of the Act, passed by the Ld. PCIT 9. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. In this case, the assessee had filed her return of income declaring total income of Rs. 33,64,100/-. During the year, the assessee was engaged in the business of manufacturing, export and sale against Form-H of electrical wiring accessories. The assessment was completed u/s 143(1) at the returned income of Rs. 33,64,100/- by the CPC. Thereafter, the case was reopened u/s 147 of the Act, in the context of purchase of an immovable property by the assessee at the consideration of lower than the circle rate and the details of the said difference has already been discussed earlier in para nos. 2 and 2.3 of this order. As discussed above, the assessee requested the AO for valuation of property by Valuation Officer co....