2017 (7) TMI 462

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... for a consideration of ₹ 2.37 crores and the assessee would receive 50% share out of such sale proceed. The other connected fact is that adopting valuation for the purpose of stamp duty upon presentation of the document for registration, in case of coowner, the assessing authority has assessed the sale consideration for the purpose of capital gain to ₹ 3.37 crores. Thus we do not find that the notice for reopening requires any interference in exercise of writ jurisdiction. - Decided against assessee. - SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12152 of 2017 - - - Dated:- 10-7-2017 - MR. AKIL KURESHI, AND MR. BIREN VAISHNAV, JJ. For The Petitioner : MR KETAN H SHAH, ADVOCATE ORAL ORDER ( PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the sale consideration received by the assessee works out to ₹ 1,68,90,617/( ₹ 3,37,81,233/@ 50%). The assessee have not filed Return of Income declaring capital gain on the sale proceedings received, which is liable to tax. In view of the above, I am of the opinion and have reason to believe that, the income of ₹ 1,68,90,617/chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for A.Y. 2012-13 due to the omission or failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. Thus, the case needs to be reopened by issuing notice u/s. 148 of the I.T.Act, 1961. 2. Admitted position is that the petitioner is the owner of 50% share of an immovable property in the nature o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of the Supreme Court in case of ACIT v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd, reported in (2007) 291 ITR 500 and of the decision of this Court in case of reported in Inductotherm India (P) Ltd. v. M. Gopalan, Deputy Commissioner of Income tax reported in (2013) 356 ITR 481 . 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner however submitted that the Assessing Officer has adopted a figure of ₹ 3.37 crores as the actual sale consideration going by the assessment of the coowner alone. In his case the issue is in appeal. Further, considering the petitioner's share being half of the sale consideration of ₹ 2.37 crores (as indicated in the sale deed) the income of the assessee would be below taxable limit and therefore th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X