TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (4) TMI 1250
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (i) Large cash deposit in Bank account; (ii) The assessee has also transferred one or more properties. However, as per Para 3, the A.O has made addition with regard to the purchase of the property by the assessee which did not form part of the limited scrutiny subject. The relevant Para 3 of the assessment order is extracted as follows: "3. As per the reply filed by the assessee along with other co-purchases namely Shri Hemant Bhatia, Smt. Kanchan Chhablani and Shri Manohar lal Bhaita have purchased immovable property of Rs. 10156100/- from Smt. Mangin Bai Sahu and other three co-sellers land of 707 sq. meter situated at kamal Vihar of Raipur Development authority on 03.08.2015. The total investment including the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 27,18,080/- as her share has been invested by her, in purchase of immovable property, from her undisclosed income of A.Y. 2016-17. Therefore the undisclosed investment of Rs. 27,18,080/- is treated as her income for A.Y. 2016-17 and added to her total income and charged to tax. Penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) is initiated on this issued as the assessee has concealed the particulars of her income." 3. In the present case, the scope of limited scrutiny is crystal clear that the A.O shall enquire regarding viz. (i) large cash deposits in Bank account; and (ii) the assessee has also transferred one or more properties. In other words, the properties which were transferred by the assessee. The inquiry is restricted to transfer of property by....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 50,65,900/- made by the A.O u/s. 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act with respect to difference in the Fair Market Value (FMV) i.e. stamp duty/segment rate of the aforementioned property viz. land situated at Mouja : Khapargaunge, Bilaspur (admeasuring 206.143 Sq. mtrs. ) as against the actual purchase consideration paid by the assessee vide registered deed, dated 29.04.2014, we find substance in the Ld. AR's claim that the A.O had traversed beyond the scope of his jurisdiction and made the said addition. As the case of the assessee was selected for limited scrutiny, therefore, the A.O. could not have ventured into an issue that did not form the basis for taking up the case for such scrutiny assessment. We are of the view that the A.O without gettin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sumption of jurisdiction." 4. That on examination of the facts in the present case before me and upon the basis of the reasoning as enshrined in the aforesaid judicial pronouncement, placing reliance on the said CBDT Circular (supra), it is held that the case of the assessee was selected for limited scrutiny, wherein one of the parameters was to enquire regarding transfer of property by the assessee during the year which means the A.O was to enquire regarding sale transactions, if any, by the assessee and when the word 'transfer of property by the assessee' is used in the limited scrutiny, it cannot therefore, include purchase of property or acquiring of property by the assessee, hence making addition in regard to purchase of property, i....