9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 514X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecessary to pass such order . Therefore, in view of the above discussions, the impugned orders are not sustainable in these assessment years. Accordingly, we quash the assessment orders in all these three assessment years and allow the appeals of the assessee. - ITA Nos. 140, 141 And 142/Ahd/2021 - - - Dated:- 9-9-2021 - Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice President And Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate, Shri Parimalsinh B Parmar, AR Shri Vijay Govani, AR For the Revenue : Shri Virendra Ojha, CIT-DR ORDER PER RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT : The present three appeals are directed at the instance of the assessee against separate orders of even dated 31.03.2021 passed by the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ahmedabad under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act ) for Assessment Years 2013-14, 2014-15 2015-16. The assessee has taken 11 grounds of appeal in each year. The grounds are verbatim same; therefore, for the facility of reference, we take note of the grounds from Assessment Year 2013-14, which read as under:- 1. The Ld. PCIT (Central), Ahmedab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he considered position taken by the AO with regard to completion of the project by the appellant by taxing notional income form house property from unsold housing stock. 8. The Ld. PCIT has erred on facts and in law in passing order u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the case of the appellant contradicting himself with his own assertion made in the appeal filed before the Hon'ble ITAT in the appeals filed in the case of the appellant against the order of Ld. CIT (A). 9. The Ld. PCIT has erred on facts and in law in passing order u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the case of the appellant in holding that the appellant has violated 80IB(10)(e)/(f) of the Act citing facts much prior to A.Y. 2012-13, which the AO had considered the same irrelevant even while denying 80IB(10) for AY 2012-13, ignoring undisputed fact that no two residential units were allotted/sold to one individual/relative of relative. 10. The Ld. PCIT has erred on facts and in law in passing order u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the case of the appellant without pointing out anything wrong with regards to reply filed by the appellant about the Minimum Alternate Tax payable by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpleted project till 31/03/2012. Moreover, the Sr. Town Planner, AUDA vide letter dated 21/01/2014 stated that BU permission has been granted to 480 units (out of 860) only as remaining blocks were incomplete with respect to GDCR. Thus, you violated the condition no.(a)(iii) of Section 80IB(10) of the Act. 3.1. Further, it is also noticed that Shri Naresh T Khanchandani made block booking of 5 flats by depositing ₹ 1,00,00,000/- in F.Y.2007-08 which was returned back without any interest on 22.12.2011. It is also noticed that you had received an advance of ₹ 20,33,855/- for Flat No.303 and ₹ 19,66,105/- for Flat No.304 from Shri Ramesh Gidwani. Thus, you violated the condition No.(f) of Section 80IB(10) of the Act. 3.2. Further, you had received an advance of ₹ 51,000/- for Flat No.D- 406 and ₹ 51,000/- for Flat No.408 from Shri Sunderdas Minmohal HUF. Thus, you violated the condition No.(e) of Section 80IB(10) of the Act. 3.3. The Assessing Officer had disallowed the deduction claimed by you u/s 80IB(10) of the Act during scrutiny for A.Y.2012-13 for non-completion of project till 31.03.2012. When the project was not completed til ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The basic features of sec. 263 are that the Pr. Commissioner may revise any order of assessment provided it is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue, that the revision order can be passed within two years from the end of the financial year in which the order sought to be revised was passed and the assessee must be given an opportunity of being heard before any proceedings under the section are taken. The pre-conditions for assessment under section 263 have been satisfied. Moreover, the Department has not accepted the order of the IT AT and contemplating to file Miscellaneous Application before the Hon'ble ITAT in this regard. The order under revision is challenged on account of validity of order u/s 153A, whereas this order is for non-application of provisions of Section 80ID(10) of the Act. Therefore issues are different. Even though these issues are interlinked, but to keep the issue alive and in the interest of revenue, this proceedings are completed. 6.1 The assessee has also stated that in the case of the assessee the assessment was not abated and as such no additions which are not based on the incriminating documents found during the search pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pleteness of the facts, we take note of the operating part of the order of the Tribunal in IT(SS)A No. 106, 107 and 108/Ahd/2019 for Assessment Years 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16, wherein the Tribunal, after an elaborate discussion, has quashed the assessment orders. The operating part of the order reads as under:- 64. In fact we are of the view that the conditions imposed under Section 132(3) of the Act for passing the prohibitory orders were not complied with. Accordingly, these orders passed under Section 132(3) of the Act have no validity in the eyes of law. 65. Once the prohibitory orders in the case on hand has been held as invalid then the search concluded in the month of March 2015 shall be taken as the base for calculating the period of passing the assessment order as provided under Section 153B of the Act. In other words the time limit in the case on hand expires for passing the order as on 31 March 2017. Therefore, in the present case the orders have been framed beyond the time prescribed under the provisions of law. 66. Before parting we also note that the bank lockers with respect to which prohibitory orders were passed under Section 132(3) of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
