9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (2) TMI 477X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was received by him on the transfer of the property in question. As stated by the ld AR, and rightly so, the AO without applying his mind had in a mechanical manner reopened the case of the assessee u/s 147 of the Act. Although, we are not oblivious of the fact that an AO at the time of reopening of the case of assessee is not required to conclusively prove that the income of the assessee chargeable to tax had escaped assessment, and is only required to have with him a bonafide reason to believe that the income of the assessee chargeable to tax had escaped assessment, but then, where in the totality of the facts of the case before him it can safely be gathered that no income of the assessee chargeable to tax had escaped assessment, there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A) fell into grave error by referring the matter to Valuation Officer to justify the illegal action of the Assessing Officer. 3. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (A) fell into grave error by passing a non-speaking order on the objections raised by the appellant on the action of the Valuation Officer. It is trite law that a non-speaking order is nothing but nullity. 4. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (A) fell into grave error by justifying the application of provisions of section 50C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and confirming the addition of ₹ 4,70,000/- made by the AO. 5. Any other ground which may be raised at the time of hearing. 2. Controversy involved in the present appeal lies in a narrow compa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... statement recorded of Shri Avinash Chander Bhalla one of the partner of this firm he stated that 24 marlas of land in Aman nagar came to his share at the time of division of asset in M/s Spiderman Rubber Industries and the same was sold to Shri Manohar Lal for about 9 lakhs in 2000. Proceeds of the sale was deposited in the capital gain tax account with P Sind Bank, Mota Singh Nagar, Jalandhar. He further stated that he withdrew the amount and purchased plot No. 146, Green Park, Jalandhar in May/June 2003. The assessee has not furnished any documents till date to ascertain the year of division and purchase of plot. The issue of taxation of capital gain involves in this case. In view of the facts narrated above, I have reasons to beli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his aforesaid contention, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that a perusal of the reasons to believe revealed that the case of the assessee was reopened without any application of mind and consulting the assessment records by the AO. In order to buttress his aforesaid claim, it was submitted by the ld AR that though the assessee in his return of income for the year under consideration i.e. A.Y. 2004-05 had duly disclosed the complete details as regards the purchase/sale of the properly in question, however, the AO in the impugned reasons had wrongly observed that there was failure on the part of the assessee to furnish documents for ascertaining the year of division or purchase of the plot under consideration. Our attention was drawn by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... operty had been deposited by the assessee in his CGAS Account No. 12299 with Punjab and Sind Bank, Branch: Jalandhar. In the backdrop of the fact that the assessee had deposited the entire sale proceeds in the aforesaid CGAS account, we are unable to comprehend as to how it could be held that he had suppressed the LTCG arising from the aforesaid transaction of sale of property. In sum and substance, now when the entire sale proceeds had been parked by the assessee in his aforementioned bank account, then, the entire amount of LTCG arising qua the sale of the property in question would be eligible for deduction u/s 54F of the Act. At this stage, we may herein observe, that it is only if the assessee in the succeeding years failed to utilize ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d escaped assessment, and is only required to have with him a bonafide reason to believe that the income of the assessee chargeable to tax had escaped assessment, but then, where in the totality of the facts of the case before him it can safely be gathered that no income of the assessee chargeable to tax had escaped assessment, there would be no justification on his part in reopening the case of the assessee by taking recourse to the provisions of section 147 of the Act. In the backdrop of our aforesaid observations, we not being able to persuade ourselves to uphold the very basis on which the case of the assessee had been reopened u/s 147 of the Act, thus, set aside the assessment framed by him u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act, dated 16.11 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
