TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (8) TMI 456
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0/-. In view of the provisions of S. 149(1)(a) and S. 149 (1)(b), the Ld. AO erred in assuming the jurisdiction to reopen the assessment. The order is therefore invalid, bad in law and is liable to quash. GROUND NO. 2: The assessment is reopened without tangible material 48A(b)/A On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. DRP and the Ld. AO failed to consider the evidences submitted before him, in response to notice u/s. 148A(b)/As such there was no tangible material available with the assessing officer that would justify reopening the case under Section 147. Moreover, the addition of Rs.. 12,35,000/- made by the assessing officer is based on the information supplied by assessee himself. GROUND NO. 3: Addition beyond the scope of reasons recorded for reopening On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. DRP and the Ld. AO erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 12,35,000 made by the AO, who, having accepted the assessee's explanation on the reasons recorded in the Section 148 notice and made no addition thereon, exceeded jurisdiction by making additions on grounds beyond the scope of the said notice, witho....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... loan of Rs. 1.08 crore from the PNB Housing Finance Ltd and the remaining payment pertaining to the cost of the acquisition was paid from the loan received from parents, parents-in-law and relatives. By referring to the reply filed by the assessee, the learned AR submitted that the necessary documentary evidences were also furnished by the assessee in support of its contentions. However, vide order passed under section 148A(d) of the Act, the submission of the assessee was completely disregarded, and it was held that the income chargeable to tax amounting to Rs. 1,09,09,151 has escaped assessment. The learned AR submitted that the conclusion vide aforesaid order passed under section 148A(d) of the Act is completely erroneous, as the assessee duly substantiated with necessary documentary evidence that he availed a loan of Rs. 1.08 crore from the PNB Housing Finance Ltd. and the validity of the documentary evidence has not been doubted by the Revenue. The learned AR submitted that this submission is duly corroborated by the final assessment order, under which the addition under section 69A of the Act is confined to Rs. 12,35,000, being the loan received by the assessee from his in-l....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion shall not apply in a case where,- (a) a search is initiated under section 132 or books of account, other documents or any assets are requisitioned under section 132A in the case of the assessee on or after the 1st day of April, 2021; or (b) the Assessing Officer is satisfied, with the prior approval of the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner that any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized in a search under section 132 or requisitioned under section 132A, in the case of any other person on or after the 1st day of April, 2021, belongs to the assessee; or (c) the Assessing Officer is satisfied, with the prior approval of the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner that any books of account or documents, seized in a search under section 132 or requisitioned under section 132A, in case of any other person on or after the 1st day of April, 2021, pertains or pertain to, or any information contained therein, relate to, the assessee; or (d) the Assessing Officer has received any information under the scheme notified under section 135A pertaining to income chargeable to tax escaping assessment for any assessment year in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....148A of the Act, it is evident that the section itself now mandates the AO to conduct enquiries, provide an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and after considering the assessee's reply, pass an order deciding whether it is a fit case for issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act. Therefore, the prima facie satisfaction of the AO or "reason to believe" is no longer the relevant criterion to test the decision of the AO for issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act under the new regime of reassessment proceedings w.e.f 01/04/2021. Thus, we are of the considered view that the provisions of section 148A of the Act, during the relevant period, i.e. w.e.f. 01/04/2021, specifically requires the decision by the AO, on the basis of the material available on record, including the reply of the assessee, whether or not it is a fit case to issue a notice under section 148 of the Act by passing an order. Further, the requirement of passing an order under section 148A(d) of the Act has not been laid down under the statute as an empty formality, and the AO has to apply its mind to the material available and the reply of the assessee, before declaring that it is a fit case to is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....,151 by the assessee. Accordingly, the assessee was asked to show cause as to why the notice under section 148 of the Act should not be issued on the basis of the material. The assessee filed its response on 26/02/2024, submitting that he availed the housing loan of Rs. 1.08 crore from the PNB Housing Finance Ltd for funding the purchase of the flat in Pune. In support of its submission, the assessee, inter alia, furnished a copy of the disbursement advice of the PNB Housing Finance Ltd and a copy of receipts and cheques for payment made to the builder. Since the assessee is an NRI, it is evident from the record that a fresh notice under section 148A(b) of the Act was issued on 18/03/2024 by the ITO, Int Tax, Ward-4(1)(1), Mumbai. Again, the assessee, inter alia, was asked to explain the nature and source of the funds used for making the purchase, along with the supporting documentary evidence. On 28/03/2024, the assessee filed his reply, stating that he, along with his wife, jointly purchased the residential house property from the builder Meridien in Pune. The assessee also submitted that the total cost of acquisition of the immovable property, including payments made towards con....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....NB Housing Finance Ltd. 4) Copy of Disbursement Advice of PNB Housing Finance Ltd. 5) Copies of Receipts & Cheques for Payment made to Builder Meridian (AOP) 13. The AO, vide order dated 30/03/2024 passed under section 148A(d) of the Act, held that the income amounting to Rs. 1,09,09,151 has escaped assessment for the year under consideration, and therefore, it is a fit case for issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act. The relevant findings of the AO, vide order passed under section 148A(d) of the Act, are reproduced as follows: - "Findings of the Assessing Officer: As per the information shared by Jt. Sub Registrar Haveli-15, the assessee has purchased immovable property located at Baner, Pune for a purchase consideration of Rs. 1,09,09,151/- on 17.10.2016 On perusal of schedule of payments made by the assessee to builder, it is observed that, assessee has made payment of Rs. 1,01,50,906 on 18.10.2016 Rs. 1,09,091 on 06.01.2017 and Rs. 5,40,003 on 06.01.2017. Assessee has furnished receipts issued by seller for these payments. On perusal of loan disbursement advice issued by PNB Housing Finance Ltd, it is observed that as on ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... than Rs. 50,00,00. Hence, this case falls within the provisions of section 149(1)(b) of the IT Act. Further, provisions of section 151 of the IT Act are also reproduced as under: - "151. Specified authority for the purposes of section 148 and section 148A shall be, - (i) Principal Commissioner or Principal Director or Commissioner or Director, if three years or less than three years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year, (ii) Principal Chief Commissioner or Principal Director General or Chief Commissioner or Director General, if more than three years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year:]" 6. In this case no return of income has been filed for the year under consideration accordingly, no assessment was made. Further, the requirements to initiate proceedings u/s. 147 of Income Tax Act, 1961 as provided by sections 148A r.w.s. 148 of the Act have been duly followed. In view of the above, provisions of section 147 are applicable to the fact of this case and the assessment year under consideration is deemed to be a case where income chargeable to tax of Rs. 1,09,09,151/-has escaped assessment. Therefore, this....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....000/- 3. Partik Manik Shah AYVPS0753P 3,35,000/- 4. Deepak Mukund Talim ACDPT2319L 5,00,000/- (i) Identity of the loan donor i.e. PAN, Aadhar etc. (ii) Creditworthiness of the loan donor i.e. Return of Income of relevant assessment year. (iii) Genuineness of the transaction i.e. Bank statement of loan donor." In response to the above, you have submitted bank statements of all the donors and return of income of only one donor i.e. Deepak Mukund Talim. On perusal of these details, it is found that three donors i.e. Manik Hukumchand Shah, Sangeeta Manik Shah and Partik Manik Shah have not filed their return of income for the year under consideration. Hence, these three donors has failed to prove their creditworthiness. Further, on perusal of bank statements of these three donors, it is found that before making the payment almost same amount credited in their account. On perusal of bank statement of Partik Manik Shah, it is found that cash deposit of Rs. 30,000/- and Rs. 45,000/- were made on 07.09.2016 and 17.09.2016 respectively. Further, two more credits of Rs. 30,000/- were also received on 17.09.2016 in Partik Ma....