9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 734X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... should be rejected. In view of the above discussion, this ground of appeal of assessee is rejected. Addition of sales - assessee submitted that it was a sale transaction without monetary consideration and in her alternate contention she has contended that the assessee being a house wife has no source of income - Held that:- The assessee has filed copy of the sale deed on record which clearly shows that assessee has paid ₹ 20,00,000/- to the seller/vendor in cash. Therefore, subsequent affidavits of deed writer, vendor and witnesses to the sale deed are not relevant and are clearly after thought and have been rightly rejected by the authorities below. The assessee failed to explain source of investment in purchase of property. All t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpliance to the notice under section 143(2), the assessee s counsel appeared before AO and filed replies to the questionnaire issued by AO time to time. 4. As per AIR information, the assessee had purchased immovable property for ₹ 63,17,000/- in assessment year under appeal. The assessee filed the reply as well as filed copy of the sale deed. It was submitted that as per family settlement, the property under consideration was transferred in the name of assessee, which was earlier in the name of Shri. Kirmender Singh son of assessee. It was further submitted that it was transferred without consideration and no monetary transaction was involved. The reply of the assessee was not found plausible as it is clearly mentioned in the sale ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der Singh and affidavits of witnesses to the sale deed in which it was stated that no consideration was paid for sale of the property. The learned CIT (A) however did not accept contention of assessee because affidavits filed later on was afterthought and cannot challenge the contents of the registered sale. The appeal of the assessee was accordingly dismissed. 8. Learned counsel for the assessee contended that no notice under section 143(2) was issued by the AO therefore reassessment is liable to be quashed. The learned DR however objected to contention of learned counsel for the assessee on the ground that assessee did not raise this issue before AO as well as learned CIT (A). Learned counsel for the assessee referred to PB 124 which i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion 148 of the Act on 17th March, 2015 showing nil income. The AO has mentioned in the assessment order that notice under section 143(2) was issued on 17th March, 2015. Even the submissions of learned counsel for the assessee also supports that notice under section 143(2) dated 17 March, 2015 was issued and served upon assessee within the period of limitation. Copy of the notice is filed at page 124 of the paper book. Learned counsel for the assessee admitted that no assessment proceedings for assessment year 2008-09 were pending, therefore, the AO while preparing the notice under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act for year in question has mentioned by inadvertent mistake that return submitted by assessee on 17th March, 2015 for assessm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he case of the Revenue. In the case of Aravali Engineers Ltd. v. CIT [2011] 335 ITR 508, Hon ble Punjab and Haryana High Court considered the plea raised by the assessee that assessment is time barred on the ground that notice under section 143(2) was not served within the stipulated time. The Tribunal held that the assessee did not raise the plea earlier in spite of opportunity being available and on a question of fact, such a plea could not be allowed to be raised for the first time before the Tribunal. The assessee placed reliance upon judgments of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the cases of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 229 ITR 383 and Jute Corpn. of India v. CIT [1991] 187 ITR 688 (SC). Hon ble High Court observed that in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee being a house wife has no source of income and as such source of his family should have been considered and that the affidavits of deed writer, son of assessee (Vendor) and witnesses to the sale deed should be considered that no monetary consideration passed on sale of the property in question. The learned DR however submitted that the sale deed clearly mentioned that sale consideration of ₹ 20,00,000/- have been paid by assessee. Therefore appeal of assessee has no merit. 11. After considering rival submissions, I am not inclined to interfere with the orders of the authorities below. Hon ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Paramjit Singh v. ITO [2010] 323 ITR 588 has held as under: It is a well known princi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
