9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Appeal against order of Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) under section 143(3) and 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 regarding income-escaping assessment and validity of Section 50C.
The appeal was filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals)-I at Coimbatore, dated 1-6-2012, pertaining to the assessment year 2005-06 under section 143(3), read with section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Grounds raised by the assessee: 1. Challenge to the reason for income escaping assessment under section 147 and limitation period. 2. Dispute regarding disclosure of material facts for computation of capital gains. 3. Argument on the constitutional validity of Section 50C and valuation of property. 4. Allegation of the impugned proceedings being contrary to law and excessive. The Assessing Officer reopened the assessment under section 147 after three years, contending that the assessee had underreported the sale consideration of a property under section 50C. The original assessment valued the property at Rs. 1,74,00,000, whereas the reassessment valued it at Rs. 1,83,89,000, leading to income-escaping assessment. The original assessment under section 143(3) was thorough, with the assessee providing all necessary details, including photostat copies of the sale deed. The Tribunal noted that the original sale deed would typically be held by the buyer, and the assessee's submission of certified copies sufficed. The Tribunal found no failure on the part of the assessee in disclosing required details for assessment under section 143(3). The Tribunal concluded that since there was no failure on the part of the assessee in disclosing necessary details, the income-escaping assessment under section 147, initiated after four years, was time-barred. Consequently, the impugned assessment was deemed invalid due to being beyond the statutory limitation period. As a result, the Tribunal set aside the impugned assessment and vacated the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals), ultimately allowing the appeal filed by the assessee. Note: The judgment was pronounced on Monday, the 26th of November, 2012 at Chennai.
|
