9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 549X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of 1961). 3. Facts relevant for considering the challenge as raised are that the petitioner is an individual assessee to tax. On 23.03.2022 he was served with a notice under Section 148 A(b) of the Act of 1961 calling upon him to show cause as to why notice under Section 148 of the Act of 1961 should not be issued. It was stated that on the basis of information it was found that for Assessment Year 2015-16 income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 147 of the Act of 1961. The petitioner was informed that he purchased immovable property for Rs.40,00,000/- and that he had deposited cash of Rs. 20,71,500/- and Rs.16,20,000/-in his bank account. The petitioner was called upon to submit his response to the no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... party to the transaction of sale/purchase of the property in question. The property had been purchased by his daughter who was separately assessed for income tax and the name of the petitioner was mentioned as he was her constituted attorney. Despite supplying copy of the registered sale deed, the Assessing Officer ignored the same while passing the order under Section 148A(d) of the Act of 1961. He also submitted that the source of information with regard to deposit of Rs.16,20,000/- was not intimated to the petitioner especially when the petitioner had sought for such information. Under Section 149(1)(b) of the Act of 1961 the time limit for issuing the notice for re-opening of the assessment beyond three years but not less than ten year ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , it would be necessary to refer to certain undisputed facts. The notice under Section 148 A(b) dated 23.03.2022 grants time to the petitioner to respond to the same by 29.03.2022. The period as granted is less than seven days as prescribed by Section 148A(b) of the Act of 1961. Nevertheless, the petitioner has responded to the notice by his reply dated 29.03.2022. Alongwith the reply, copy of the registered sale deed dated 03.02.2015 indicating that it was his daughter who had purchased the immovable property therein was supplied. The petitioner's daughter is separately assessed for tax. The name of the petitioner is mentioned as special power of attorney holder for his daughter. The registered sale deed clearly indicates that the petitio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and Rs.16,20,000/- thus totaling Rs.36,91,500/-. In this regard, if the provisions of Section 149(1)(b) of the Act of 1961 are considered, it is seen that only if the amount in question that is likely to have escaped assessment is Rs.50,00,000/- or more, the time limit for issuing notice to re-open the assessment is three years but less than ten years. Thus if the income that is likely to escape assessment is only Rs.36,91,500/- after excluding the amount of Rs.40,00,000/-, it is clear that the proceedings are not liable to be re-opened as the amount involved is less than the one contemplated under Section 149(1)(b) of the Act of 1961 and the same pertains to Assessment Year 2015-16. The notice under Section 148(b) is dated 23.03.2022 which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
