TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 782
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ith Mr. Anant Mann and Mr. P. Gupta, JSCs. For the Respondent : Mr. Sumit Lalchandani, Mr. Utkarsha Kumar Gupta and Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Advocates. ORDER 1. This case has a checkered history of twelve years, in which, the petitioner, widow of the assessee-late Mr. Dipankar Mohan Ghosh, despite having taken a number of legal recourses, is at crossroads with foggy paths on each sides. 2. The subject matter of dispute or litigation has been sale of a house property, which the assessee had affected qua which he later moved an application before the Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR); then reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1961') were triggered; followe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Tribunal in the meantime had set aside the order of the Commissioner which was passed under Section 263 of the Act of 1961. 5. Resultantly, the assessment order dated 28.10.2022 (subsequently rectified vide order dated 15.03.2024) passed in the petitioner's case, wherein the petitioner's income from sale of property was assessed at Rs. 59,05,55,783/- stood revived or alive. 6. The petitioner's grievance against this assessment order encompasses various issues, out of which the major issue is, that the AO did not give benefit of prepaid taxes (advance tax and TDS) apart from other issues relating to merit of the valuation etc. 7. The reason for which the AO did not give credit of the prepaid taxes is, that the petitio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ur, he was not required to file return. It is a different matter altogether that before the AAR could decide the issue the AO issued notice under Section 148 of the Act of 1961. In any case, the assessee had no intention to avoid payment of tax. That apart, a huge amount of tax had been deducted at source, so the assessee would in any case have filed the return to claim refund of the amount that was deducted more than the tax liability. 12. Be that as it may. We are of the firm view that the respondents or the Union of India cannot deny the credit of the amount of tax deducted at source or prepaid taxes of Rs. 16,58,02,551/-. Even according to the AO, the respondent-assessee is entitled for adjustment of prepaid taxes to the extent of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppeal filed by the Department is allowed and the matter is remanded back to the AO, without the substantial questions of law being answered. 17. The order of the ITAT dated 28.06.2023 so also the order dated 26.02.2018 passed by AO are set aside. The matter is restored back to the AO. The AO shall treat the Return of Income, which was filed by the petitioner on 02.12.2015, as return under Section 139 of the Act of 1961 with a further direction to pass a fresh assessment order, while giving credit of TDS in accordance with law, of course after due verification. 18. Since order of ITAT has been set aside, the penalty order dated 28.04.2023 is also quashed and set aside. The AO shall obviously be free to take up penalty proceedings afres....