9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 1476X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the assessments therefore cannot be quashed. - Decided against the assessee. - R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 21600 of 2017 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 22938 of 2017 - - - Dated:- 14-8-2018 - MR. AKIL KURESHI AND MR. B. N. KARIA, JJ. For The PETITIONER : Mr BS SOPARKAR for Mrs SWATI SOPARKAR, Advocates For The RESPONDENT : Mr M.R BHATT, Sr Advocate with Mrs MAUNA M BHATT, Advocate COMMON ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) These petitions involve similar facts and would be disposed of by this judgment. We may record facts from Special Civil Application No. 22938 of 2017. The petitioner has challenged a notice dated 30th March 2017 issued by the respondent-Assessing Officer to reopen th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Survey No. Registration No. Value of registered Documents 1 Sargasan 430-A, 430/K,430-F, 430-H,430-E/1, 434/1-K, 434/1-D 10488/2009 Rs.3,40,56,100/- 2 Sargasan 430-G 10480/2009 Rs.52,05,200/- The total amount of cash transaction includes in the sale of land at Tarapur/Sargasan carried out by the group is ₹ 33,24,89,500/- and the total area is 84,732 Sq. metres and the share of the above mentioned assessee on the land at Sargasan under different survey numbers as appearing in the registered docume ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r dated 24th November 2017. Before such objections could be disposed of, these petitions came to be filed. We may record that for the reasons, more elaborate but essentially similar as in the present case, number of assessments were reopened in case of this very assessee and other group entities. All these notices for reopening of assessment were challenged by the respective noticees in Special Civil Application No.16385 of 2017 and connected petitions. These petitions were dismissed by the common judgment dated 2nd April 2018. The present two petitions were separated on the contention of learned counsel for the petitioners that there was no taxable event which arose during the period relevant to A.Y 2011-2012 so as to enable the Assessi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were made under Section 143 [3] of the Act without any scrutiny. As per the Assessing Officer, there is prima facie material to suggest cash payments for purchase of land in different proportion by the petitioners. Larger issues were examined by us in the said judgment dated 2nd April 2018 which cover number of assesses of the same group and concerned respective notices for reopening of their assessments for earlier year ie., AY 2010-2011. All contentions for and against were examined and petitions were dismissed. Broadly, the very same issues arose in the present petitions except an additional element contended by learned advocate for the petitioners that no taxing event took place during the present year. Such contention cannot be accept ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
