9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 606X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Assessing Officer is contrary to the settled law, which demonstrates that the Assessing Officer has not applied his mind independently. Hence, we find force into the submission made by the assessee. The impugned assessment order is hereby quashed being contrary to the law. - Decided in favour of assessee - ITA No. 465/JP/2016 - - - Dated:- 12-4-2018 - SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM For The Assessee : Shri Satish Kumar Gupta, (CA) For The Revenue : Shri J.C. Kulhari (JCIT) ORDER PER: KUL BHARAT, J.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 01/02/2016 passed by the ld. CIT(A), Alwar for the A.Y. 2008-09. The grounds taken by the assessee in appeal are as under:- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the date of notification and that too for only 15% of land. 8. On the facts circumstances of the case Ld. A.O. grossly erred in making additions under the head Long Term Capital Gains for ₹ 7,90,500/- by invoking the provisions of section 50C of the Act. 2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the case of the assessee was reopened for assessment and the assessment U/s 147 read with Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as the Act) was framed vide order dated 18/10/2013. While framing the assessment, the A.O. adopted the DLC rate of the property sold during the year and taxed accordingly. Thus, the Assessing Officer made addition of ₹ 7,90,500/- against the capital gain. 3. Being ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onsidering all the material on the record like computation of income, copy of agreement to sale, copy of valuation report of approved valuer and information received from sub registrar Sanganer II in respect of DLC rate accepted the Long Term Capital Gain declared by the assessee u/s 143 (3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Thereafter simply on the basis of audit report, Ld Assessing Officer initiated the reassessment proceeding which is on the basis of change of opinion and without bringing any fresh and new material on record. Therefore the action of Ld Assessing Officer to initiate reassessment proceedings is totally unlawful. We humbly rely on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT v/s Kelvindator ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that reasons for reopening were almost identically worded as that of audit report. No material emerged to indicate any independent application of mind. It was held that AO has not formed his independent belief. Initiating reassessment proceedings on invoking Section 50C is unlawful. No sanction from superior authority u/s 151 of the Income Tax Act. 1961. Yourhonour, in this case the original assessment was made u/s 143 (3) of the Income Tax Act 1961 by Ld ITO Ward 3, Bharatpur on dated 20-12-2010. The notice u/s 148 was issued by the ITO Ward 3, Bharatpur on dated 22-03-2013. It is clear from the reassessment notice itself that no satisfaction on the reasons recorded has been recorded by Joint Commissioner of Income Tax. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n, (iii) the requisite approval as contemplated U/s 151 of the Act was not obtained and (iv) the addition is made on the basis of adopting the valuation as per the stamp valuation authority, which is ex facie erroneous in view of the fact that Section 50C of the Act came on statute book w.e.f. 01/10/2009, hence is not applicable on the facts of the present case. We find that these objections are not adverted by the ld. CIT(A). The revenue could not controvert the fact that the reopening has been made to meet the objections raised by the audit party. It is also not disputed that the assessment was reopened after four years from the end of the relevant assessment year and no approval U/s 151 of the Act is placed on record. Moreover, the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
