9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (5) TMI 275 - AT - Income TaxReopening of assessment u/s 147 - HELD THAT - Assessment was reopened on the basis of the information available with the Assessing Officer regarding concealment of income by the assessee. He, therefore, submitted that reopening is justified under the facts and circumstances of the present case. The assessee has not provided any supporting evidence in respect of the ground taken by the assessee. Therefore, in the absence of any supporting evidence,we do not see any reason to interfere in the finding of CIT(A). Ground is dismissed. Non-providing opportunity to the assessee before transferring the jurisdiction by the Assessing Officer from Ward 1(1) Noida to Circle 71(1), New Delhi - HELD THAT - The assessee has not filed any evidence in support of the allegation that he was not given opportunity before transfer of jurisdiction u/s.127 of the Act. In the absence of such evidence I do not see any merit in the ground raised by the assessee. Accordingly, ground no. 3 is dismissed. Issuance of notice u/s. 143(2) before filing of return of income in response to the notice u/s. 148 - HELD THAT - Assessing Officer in the assessment order has categorically stated that Shri R.K. Tayal, CA and AR of the assessee attended the assessment proceedings and filed copy of ITR and thereafter statutory notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act was issued on 13.9.2017. Hence, this ground is devoid of any merit and stands rejected accordingly.
Issues:
1. Quashing of assessment order and rejection of additional grounds without notice. 2. Legality of reopening assessment under Section 148. 3. Transfer of jurisdiction without providing opportunity to be heard. 4. Issuance of notice under Section 143(2) before filing return of income in response to Section 148 notice. 5. Addition of long-term capital gains on sale of shares. 6. Appeal for altering, amending, adding, or substituting grounds during appeal. Issue 1 - Quashing of Assessment Order and Rejection of Additional Grounds: The appellant challenged the assessment order's legality and the rejection of additional grounds without notice by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The appellant argued for a fair chance to present reasons for additional grounds, claiming the rejection was erroneous, illegal, and unwarranted. The Tribunal dismissed this ground as it was not supported by evidence, maintaining the Commissioner's decision. Issue 2 - Legality of Reopening Assessment: The appellant contested the legality of reopening the assessment under Section 148, alleging jurisdictional errors by the Assessing Officers. The Tribunal upheld the reopening, citing concealment of income by the appellant and lack of evidence supporting the appellant's claim. The ground was dismissed for lack of merit. Issue 3 - Transfer of Jurisdiction: The appellant objected to the transfer of jurisdiction without an opportunity to be heard. The Tribunal found no evidence supporting the appellant's claim of denial of opportunity before jurisdiction transfer, leading to the dismissal of this ground. Issue 4 - Notice Under Section 143(2) Timing: The appellant challenged the issuance of a notice under Section 143(2) before filing the return of income in response to the Section 148 notice. The Tribunal rejected this ground, noting that the notice under Section 143(2) was issued after the income tax return filing, as per the Assessing Officer's records. Issue 5 - Addition of Long-term Capital Gains: The appellant disputed the addition of long-term capital gains on the sale of shares, arguing for the determination of the actual sale date and consideration of subsequent agreements. The Tribunal upheld the addition, citing factual findings by the Commissioner that were not contradicted by the appellant, resulting in the rejection of this ground. Issue 6 - Appeal Ground Alteration: The appellant requested the flexibility to alter, amend, add, or substitute grounds during the appeal. The Tribunal noted this ground as general and did not provide a separate adjudication. In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the appellant's appeal, upholding the assessment order and decisions made by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) regarding the issues raised by the appellant. The judgment was pronounced on 18th April, 2022.
|
