9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (6) TMI 945X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... also makes the notice under Section 143(2) void-ab-initio. These aspects were not challenged by the assessee as the Assessing Officer assessed the income of the assessee at Nil and the assessee therefore, never challenged the assessment order at any stage. As the assessment itself becomes bad in law and therefore, the order of the Principal CIT under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 itself becomes nullity as there is no assessment order in the eyes of law. Therefore, the additional grounds are allowed. Bogus LTCG - The notice which was issued by the Principal CIT stating therein that the Assessing Officer failed to verify the genuineness of the exemption of Long Term Capital Gain claim on the sale of shares of M/s. Channel - Nine and also that of the Assessing Officer failed to enquire about the persons who have purchased the above mentioned shares at a high rate of ₹ 439 per share, appears to be incorrect. The Principal CIT has not at all taken into consideration the reconciliation in respect of Long term capital gain. AO in the instant case has verified all the aspects and therefore, the view taken by the Principal CIT is only a second view which is not permi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... IT failed to note that shares were sold at recognized stock exchange and neither the seller nor the buyer knows each other. Moreover, the assessee filed all the details relating to shares sold during the year under assessment. Every AO has different way of working and AO was fully satisfied with the papers filed and day to day discussion held during assessment proceedings. The assessee should not suffer for the negligence of a senior officer. It is against the principle of natural justice. Thus the order u/s. 263 cancelling the assessment is totally wrong, bad in law and needs to be quashed. 3. That the above grounds of appeal are without prejudice to another. 4. That the assessee prays permission to add, delete or amend one or more grounds of appeal. 5. That the order u/s. 263 is bad, illegal and unjustified on the merits of the case and must be quashed. That the assessee assures unstinted co-operation in all proceedings before your goodself. Additional Grounds The applicant had raised six grounds in the original appeal. The following grounds may also be kindly admitted: 7(i). On the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. Pr. CIT has erred both ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... otice u/s. 143(2) issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer i.e. DCIT, Circle 25(2) was dated 10/3/2017. Thus, the notice u/s. 143(2) was not issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer i.e. DCIT, Circle 25(2) dated 10/3/2017 is barred by limitation. In this manner, the proceedings u/s. 143(3) for the relevant assessment year as well as the order passed in consequence thereto are bad in law. Since, in the assessment order framed u/s. 143(3) dated 2/5/2017, no additions were made the applicant did not have any occasion to raise this issue of lack of jurisdiction before any of the appellate authorities. Therefore, the Ld. AR relying on various decisions submitted that the additional ground should be admitted. 6. On merit, the Ld. AR submitted that the Principal CIT while issuing notice has given three aspects but overlooked the re-conciliation filed by the assessee in respect of long term capital gain and first issue was not at all discussed by the Principal CIT. 7. The Ld. DR objected to the admission of the additional grounds for the reason that the assessee has not challenged assessment order u/s. 143(2) and, therefore, at this juncture cannot contest the validity of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aid Assessing Officer in assessee's case. There was no change of jurisdiction sought by the Revenue as per Section 124 read with Section 120 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Thus, on the point of jurisdiction relating to issuance of notice also makes the notice under Section 143(2) void-ab-initio. These aspects were not challenged by the assessee as the Assessing Officer assessed the income of the assessee at Nil and the assessee therefore, never challenged the assessment order at any stage. As the assessment itself becomes bad in law and therefore, the order of the Principal CIT under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 itself becomes nullity as there is no assessment order in the eyes of law. Therefore, the additional grounds are allowed. 9. Despite the technical aspects wherein the assessee succeeds in her additional grounds, we have also looked into the merits of the case and it is found that letter dated 13.04.2017 filed by the assessee along with the documents pertaining to purchase and sale of shares, purchase of Euro Gold, Purchase of Channel Nine Shares, Copy of purchase bills contract notes for Euro Gold, Statement of Accounts in Amrapali Trading and Investments ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
