9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (5) TMI 84X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed inspite of being asked to, would, thus, violate the mandate of the Apex Court laid down in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer & others [2002 (11) TMI 7 - SUPREME Court] wherein it has been held that the Assessing Officer is bound to dispose of the objections by passing a speaking order. The petitioner had filed the revision petitions under Section 264 and thereafter, the rectification application was filed under Section 154 of the Act. Admittedly, the rectification application was also within limitation and solely on account of the fact that it was filed just before the limitation coming to an end, would not be a ground for respondent No.2 to deny the relief. Merely on the ground that the amount of demand on conclusion of the reassessment proceedings was more than ₹ 1 lac, on the income which is chargeable and which had escaped assessment would have to be seen at the time of issuing notice under Section 149 of the Act and not at the time of the conclusion of assessment proceedings and therefore, the reasoning arrived at by respondent No.2 is also without any justification. Also there was sufficient material before respondent No.1 regarding the amount o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he land of the HUF of the deceased assessee was acquired vide notification issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1854. The award was passed on 21.02.1992 by the Land Acquisition Collector, Panchkula (for short, the 'LAC') and as per the case of the petitioner, the land was situated out of the limits of the notified area and the compensation amount received was exempted from the Long Term Capital Gain (for short, the 'LTCG'). 4. A notice dated 11.03.2003, under Section 148 of the Act was issued by recording reasons that 15 acres of land had been acquired and the amount had been deposited in four bank accounts of Panipat and income tax returns had been filed for the assessment years 1994-95 and 1995-96 but no return for income had been filed for the year 1996-97. As per the reasons, the quantum of income which had escaped assessment was ₹ 2,54,659/- for the period from 01.04.1995 to 31.03.1996, relevant to assessment year 1996-97. On account of the reason to believe that due to the failure on the part of the assessee to file his income tax returns for the said years and for the said amounts, permission was sought by the Income Tax Officer, Panip ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not liable to capital gain tax which had been wrongly charged on the enhanced compensation and was liable to be exempted apart from raising other objections. 7. Respondent No.2 only dealt with the issue of LTCG and held that the assessee had been asked to produce the copy of the original notification issued by the State Government and therefore, it was not possible to verify the genuineness of the contention of the assessee and the same was rejected. However, on the issue of limitation, for the assessment years 1996-97 and 1998-99, no reference was made whether the proceedings were time-barred, as had been raised before respondent No.1. 8. In the meantime, the assessee expired. Resultantly, the rectification application, under Section 154 of the Act, was filed on 28.02.2013 wherein copy of the objections dated 26.02.2004 were also attached and written submissions dated 05.04.2013, were also submitted, taking the plea that the land which had been acquired was not situated within the notified area and the notification was only issued on 06.01.1994 for Panipat and the enhanced amount of compensation was exempted from LTCG. Reliance was placed upon the judgment of the Apex Court ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8 shall be issued for the relevant assessment year,- (a) if four years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless the case falls under clause (b) [or clause (c)]; (b) if four years, but not more than six years, have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year unless the income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment amounts to or is likely to amount to one lakh rupees or more for that year. 12. After hearing counsel for the parties, we are of the view that the assessee has raised a legal objection in his communications dated 26.02.2004 and 27.02.2004 before respondent No.1, pertaining to the assessment years 1996-97 and 1997-98 wherein he has raised the objection of jurisdiction under Section 149(1)(b) and specified that the income chargeable would be the income that escaped tax, which is the relevant factor. Thus, the quantum of tax which has excaped assessment was to be kept in mind. Admittedly, the interest income was only ₹ 2,54,659/- which had, supposedly, escaped income and the return had not been filed. The income chargeable to tax on the said amount was, thus, relevant factor which was sought to be agitated but never ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 08.03.2004 and therefore, the respondent No.1 was not justified in coming to the conclusion that the deceased-assessee had not supplied the material facts. It was also the bounden duty of respondent No.1 to take into consideration the fact that the land fell within the notified area of the Panipat Municipality or not. 14. In CWP Nos.5285, 5309, 5311 5313 of 2014, the assessee had filed his returns but the interest received by the assessee was assessed to tax without taking into consideration the tax deducted at source and without referring to the interest certificates issued by the banks, on the same grounds that the assessee was not cooperating. 15. Accordingly, we are of the view that the matter is liable to be remanded to respondent No.1 for fresh decision and to take into consideration the returns filed for each assessment years, separately, and also take into consideration the TDS certificates issued by the banks regarding the interest element. The issue of jurisdiction for the 2 years pertaining to the years 1996-97 and 1997-98, as arising under Section 149(1)(b) also be specifically dealt with. Resultantly, the present writ petitions are allowed and the impu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
