Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2024 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (1) TMI 353 - AT - Income TaxReopening of assessment u/s 147 - addition being LTCG on sale of flat - claim of exemption u/s 54 of the Act for the LTCG on sale of flat - HELD THAT - In the present case, it is undisputed that the sale of immovable property and subsequent purchase of immovable property were not disclosed by the assessee in his original return of income physically filed on 03/11/2011. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the reassessment proceedings were validly initiated by the AO under section 147 of the Act on the basis of information received from the ITD system under the NMS module, which constitutes tangible material u/s 147 of the Act. Accordingly, reassessment proceedings initiated u/s 147 and issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act are upheld. As a result, ground no. 1 raised in assessee s appeal is dismissed. However, at the same time, it is also evident from the reasons recorded by the AO while reopening the assessment, that the assessee purchased immovable property valued at Rs. 1,46,88,500 and sold immovable property at Rs. 1,27,00,000, during the year under consideration. Thus, when such are the facts, we are of the considered view that the AO was also required to grant the benefit of section 54 of the Act to the assessee while computing the income under the head capital gains . However, as evident from the record, despite noting the aforesaid reasons for reopening the assessment, the AO merely computed the long-term capital gains and added the same to the total income of the assessee, without granting the benefit of section 54 of the Act as provided under the law. Therefore, in view of the facts and circumstances as noted above, we deem it appropriate to restore the computation of income under the head capital gains to the file of the AO for de novo adjudication as per law after verification of the claim of exemption under section 54 of the Act. The assessee is directed to furnish all the documents/information in support of his claim under section 54 of the Act. As a result, grounds no. 2 and 3 raised in assessee s appeal are allowed for statistical purposes.
Issues:
The judgment involves issues related to reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the addition of long-term capital gains not offered for taxation in the return of income. Reassessment Proceedings under Section 147: The assessee challenged the impugned order dated 31/05/2023, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The assessee had not disclosed the sale and purchase of immovable property in the original return of income filed physically. The AO initiated reassessment proceedings under section 147 based on information received from the ITD system. The Tribunal upheld the validity of the reassessment proceedings, stating that tangible material existed for the initiation of reassessment. Therefore, the reassessment proceedings under section 147 and the notice issued under section 148 were upheld, leading to the dismissal of ground no. 1 raised in the assessee's appeal. Addition of Long-term Capital Gains: The AO added long-term capital gains of Rs. 72,83,143 to the total income of the assessee as the gains were not declared in the original return of income or in the return filed in response to the notice under section 148. The Tribunal noted that the AO failed to grant the benefit of section 54 of the Act to the assessee while computing the capital gains. Despite the assessee's claim for exemption under section 54 in the revised return of income, the Revenue did not allow the exemption and added the capital gains to the total income. The Tribunal directed the AO to recompute the income under the head "capital gains" after verifying the claim of exemption under section 54 of the Act. Grounds no. 2 and 3 raised in the assessee's appeal were allowed for statistical purposes, and the appeal was partly allowed. Separate Judgement: The judgment was pronounced by Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Judicial Member, and Shri Prashant Maharishi, Accountant Member, on 08/11/2023.
|