9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 866X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly be quashed. 1.2 The action taken u/s 147 by the Id. AO is bad in law and on facts of the case, for want of jurisdiction and various other reasons and hence the same may kindly be quashed. 2.1 Rs. 1,78,784/- : The Id. CIT(A) has grossly erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in confirming the addition of Rs. 1,78,784/- on account of Short Term Capital Gain, made by the ld. AO without any basis and confronting to the assessee. Hence the addition so made and confirming by the Id. CIT(A) being absolutely, contrary to the provisions of law and, facts of the case and not in conformity with the law, hence the same may kindly be deleted in full. 3.1 Rs. 50,98,416/- : The Id. CIT(A) has grossly erred in law as well as on the fa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thereafter issued to Sh. Subhash Chand Ajmera, legal heir of the assessee who has since expired on 10.01.2012. In response, to the notice, the legal heir filed the return of income on behalf of the deceased assessee on 02.11.2015 and thereafter, the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) read with section 147 wherein the short terms capital gain on sale of land amounting to Rs. 1,78,784/- and long term capital gain on sale of land of Rs. 49,52,291/- was determined and brought to tax in hands of legal heir on behalf of the deceased assessee. Being aggrieved, the legal heir carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) who has sustained the said additions and against the said findings, the legal heir is now in appeal before us. 3. In Gro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, he has filed the objection before completion of assessment proceedings which have been ignored by the Assessing Officer. It was submitted that it is a settled legal position that the Assessing Officer cannot take advantage of ignorance of law of assessee. It was further submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has also rejected the above contentions on the wrong footing and has not correctly appreciated the facts of the case. It was accordingly submitted that both the notice u/s 148 and consequent assessment proceedings completed u/s 147 read with 143(3) are beyond the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer and therefore, the same deserves to be set aside. 5. Per contra, the ld. DR referred to the provision of section 124(3) of the Act and it was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 24.03.2015 and thereafter, notice u/s 148 was issued on 26.03.2015 in name of Shri Subhash Ajmera, legal Heir of late Shri Tarachand Ajmera. 7. In the reasons so recorded by the ITO, Ward 1(4), Jaipur, the name and of address of the assessee has been stated as Sh. Tarachand Ajmera, 3659, Bhoot Ke Kuye Ki Gali, M.S.B Ka Rasta, Johari Bazar, Jaipur. Therefore, it appears that at the time of recording of the reasons by ITO, Ward 1(4), Jaipur, the PAN AATPA4923B of the assessee was lying with the ITO, Ward 1(4), Jaipur though there is nothing on record in terms of current and past tax filings by the deceased assessee as stated by ITO, Ward 1(4). Thereafter, the notice u/s 148 dated 26.03.2015 was issued by ITO, Ward 1(4), Jaipur to Sh. Su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n is not hard to find and the same has been given by ITO Ward 1(4) where she has admitted that she doesn't have the jurisdiction over the matter and jurisdiction lies with ITO Ward 2(1), Jaipur as clear from the letter No. ITO/W-1(4)/JPR/15-16 dated 21.03.2015 written by ITO, Ward 1(4), Jaipur to the Pr. CIT-1, Jaipur and the contents thereof reads as under:- "No./ITO/W-1(4)/JPR/15-16 Dated 21.04.2015 To, The Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax-1, Jaipur (Through proper channel) Sir, Sub:- Pending assessment for A.Y 2008-09 u/s 148 in the case of Late Sh. Tarachand Ajmera (Legal Heir Shri Subhash Ajmera- PAN AATPA4912G), 3659, Bhoot Ke Kuven Ki Gali, Moti Singh Bhomio Ka Rasta, Johari Bazar, Jaipur - PAN AATPA4923B- Kindly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (3) of the Act. Therefore, even though notice has been issued by ITO, Ward 1(4), Jaipur but once she is clear that the jurisdiction over the matter lies with ITO, Ward 2(1), Jaipur, merely because the permission has not been received from the ld. Pr. CIT for transfer of PAN, she cannot proceed and pass the assessment order in absence of requisite jurisdiction at first place which is governed by last known residence address of the deceased assessee as mandated by section 124(1)(b) of the Act. The fact that jurisdiction over last known residence address of the deceased assessee lies with ITO Ward 2(1), Jaipur is also corroborated by the assessment order passed for same assessment year 2008-09 in case of the legal Heir, Shri Subhash Chand Ajme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
