TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 1712
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or short) 2014-15. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal along with additional grounds of appeal: - "1. That the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) dated 26.08.2025 and the reassessment order of the AO dated 31.03.2022 are bad in law, perverse, arbitrary, and against the principles of natural justice. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in upholding the addition of Rs.2,11,33,400/- u/s 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii), ignoring the appellant's objection that the property was purchased at its actual fair market value of Rs.1,30,00,000/-, prevalent in the actual market and not at the inflated circle rate. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in invoking Section 55A of The Income Tax....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....The stamp duty value is adopted only for the limited purpose of levy of stamp duty and cannot be automatically substituted as FMV for income-tax purposes in the absence of any independent corroborative material. Judicial pronouncements have consistently held that circle rates are only a guideline for collection of stamp duty and do not necessarily reflect actual market value. The stamp duty value can only serve as a presumptive value giving rise to the additions. The impugned order, therefore, suffers from a fundamental error of law and deserves to be quashed. 7. That the assessment order has been framed in haste on the last day of limitation, merely to avoid being time-barred, without properly considering the detailed submissions ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... same in terms of the proposition laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Thermal Power Corporation vs. CIT, 229 ITR 383 (SC), wherein no new verification is required for adjudication of the said ground. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and had filed his return of income for the year under consideration dated 22.07.2014 declaring total income at Rs. 3,01,930. The assessee's case was reopened based on the information received from ITO (I & CI), Delhi that the assessee had purchased an immovable property dated 13.03.2014 for a sale consideration of Rs. 1,30,00,000/- which stamp duty valuation was valued at Rs. 3,41,33,400/-. The Ld. AO recorded the reasons for reopening and the notic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ce of the mandatory notice under Section 143(2) of the Act and prayed for quashing of the entire assessment proceedings. 7. The Ld. AR for the assessee contended that notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was not issued to the assessee which is a mandatory requirement prior to the passing of the reassessment order. The Ld. AR further contended that not complying with the same is not a curable defect as per the Proviso to Section 292BB of the Act and it is now a settled proposition of law that the issuance of notice under Section 143(2) of the Act is a jurisdictional one which cannot be dispensed with. The Ld. AR relied on a catena of decisions of jurisdictional High Court as well as other High Courts wherein this issue is decided in fav....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... on the decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT-1, Delhi vs. M/s Dart Infrabuild (P) Ltd. dated 17.11.2023 in ITA 10/2022, relied upon by the ld. AR wherein it was held that though, in the present case, the return of income was filed, but, not within the 30 days provided by the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act, the Ld. AO treated the same to be an invalid return. The Hon'ble High Court rejected the Revenue's contention that the Ld. AO was not obliged to issue the notice under Section 143(2) of the Act since the return of income filed by the assessee was considered to be an invalid return. The Court held that the assessment proceedings shall be null and void in the absence of notice under Section 143(2....