9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 592X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rayed for quashing of the order dated 28th November, 2017, by which objections raised by the petitioner against initiation of re-assessment proceedings for the Assessment Year 2010-11 have been dismissed. 3. Return filed by the petitioner on 5th October, 2010 for the Assessment Year 2010-11, declaring 'Nil' income was taken up for scrutiny assessment for the following reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer:- "In the case assesee has declared Nil income. Gross receipt has been declared at Nil. Company has shown closing stock at Nil. As per e-filed return, assessee has shown Securities (sic. Shares) Premium Account of Rs. 1,56,00,000/- against Nil shown in immediate preceding year, thereby an increase of Rs. 1,56,00,000/- in the year u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the parties: SI.No. Name of the person/Party from whom received Opening Balance Recd. during the year Paid during the year Closing Balance Mode of receipt/payment 15. Complete details of share premium received, if any during F.Y. 2009-10 with names and addresses of the investors, copy of bank statements, I.T. particulars and other documentary evidences to substantiate the premium received. Also furnish the basis and determination of the value of such premium on shares. 16. Details of shares issued, subscribed and paid during the F.Y. 2009-10 with names and addresses of the applicants, confirmation, assessment particulars, copy of bank statement. 17. Details of exempt income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Assessing Officer enclosing documents in support of the acquisition of land from NOIDA Authority. The petitioner, in this connection, has in our opinion rightly referred to the order sheet dated 10th December, 2012, which records that the petitioner had filed details and date of taking possession of the farm house. The aforesaid submission of the petitioner gets further affirmation from the earlier order sheet dated 23rd November, 2012, which records that the petitioner would furnish details of advance against the property with documentary evidence. 7. The original file produced before us by the respondents reveals that the petitioner during the course of assessment proceedings, had filed a copy of transfer memorandum dated 28th Septem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... IDA Authority during the current assessment year for Rs. 6,63,40,000/-, out of which Rs. 1,32,68,000/- had been paid during the current year. The Assessing Officer has referred to the said information and also given details on analysis of the lease deed executed between the petitioner and the NOIDA Authority. Relevant portion of the reasons to believe for re-opening read:- "7 Information in this case has been received from Dy. Director of Income-Tax (Inv) Unit-3(1), New Delh on 15.03.2017. The officer submitted that the assessee has purchased a plot for development of farm house from New Okhla Industrial development Authority (Noida). Total premium of the plot is Rs. 6,63,40,000/- out of which Rs. 1,32,68,000/- has been paid during the F.Y ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dicated and based on the factum that the petitioner had purchased the property from NOIDA Authority, a factum known and considered by the Assessing Officer in the proceedings culminating the assessment order dated 25th February, 2013. 11. For detailed reasons recorded above, we have accepted that transaction for purchase of the farm house from NOIDA Authority and copy of lease deed was furnished to the Assessing Officer in the first round of assessment. The Assessing Officer was also aware that in the subsequent assessment year the said farm house was sold to a third party. The amount of premium paid by the petitioner to the NOIDA Authority was indicated and examined by the Assessing Officer as copy of the statement of bank accounts was fu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t framed under Section 143 (3) was erroneous and wrong. For reasons stated above, failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts is not made out and established. The transaction between the petitioner-assessee and the NOIDA Authority with regard to purchase of the farm house was examined and considered. The law on re-opening does not permit the Assessing Officer to re-examine the issue already examined in regular assessment under Section 143 (3) of the Act. Change of opinion cannot be a ground to re-open scrutiny assessment. 15. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the present writ petition is allowed and the impugned notice under Section 148 dated 28th March, 2017 is set aside and quashed. The impugned order dated 28th November, 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
