9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (8) TMI 1252X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the original assessment framed by the A.O vide his order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act, dated 31/03/2016. Thus the reopening of the assessee s case has to fail for the very reason that the same is not based on any new material that had come to the notice of the A.O after the culmination of the original assessment by him vide his order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act, but is a clear case of assumption of jurisdiction u/s 147 of the Act based on a mere Change of opinion. As an assumption of jurisdiction by the A.O for disturbing a concluded assessment of an assessee based on a change of opinion is not permitted under law, we, thus, are unable to subscribe to the jurisdiction assumed by the A.O in the present case u/s 147 of the Act. Decided in favour of assessee. - Shri Ravish Sood, Judicial Member And Shri Arun Khodpia, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Shri Sakshi Gopal Agrawal, CA For the Revenue : Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR ORDER PER RAVISH SOOD, JM: The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 12.11.2021, which arises from th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,476/- (-) Rs. 32,29,238/-] and assessed the assessee's income vide his order passed u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated 31.10.2018 at Rs. 66,97,258/-. 5. Aggrieved the assessee assailed the order passed by the A.O u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated 31.10.2018 in appeal before the CIT(Appeals), who, after deliberating on the contentions advanced by the assessee, did not find favor with the same and dismissed the appeal observing as under: 6. The appellant has taken two grounds of appeal. The first ground of appeal relates to the re-opening of assessment u/s 147 of the Act and it is contended that notice issued u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act,1961 is bad in law. The appellant has taken the plea that he has already been assessed u/s 143(3) of the Act and u/s 147 of the Act and that all facts material to the assessment have been disclosed, hence issue of notice u/s 148 four year from the end of the relevant assessment year is bad is law. 6.2 The appellant during the course of appellate proceedings has never submitted any reply or furnished the copies of the orders claimed to be passed u/s 143(3) or 147 for the relevant years. Hence in the absence of any material evidenc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t has not furnished any supporting material to establish the claim for improvement in property or deductions claimed in return filed in response to the notice u/s 148 of the Act. The onus of proving the correctness of expenditure or deduction claimed in the return of income lies on the assessee. In the given case the burden/onus has not been discharged by appellant to establish the genuineness and admissibility of deductions/expenditure claimed. Under the circumstances, the action of the Assessing Officer is justified in disallowing the same and action of Assessing Officer is hereby upheld. The ground of appeal is hereby dismissed. 8. Accordingly, for statistical purposes, the appeal is treated as dismissed. 6. The assessee, being aggrieved with the order of the CIT(Appeals), has carried the matter in appeal before us. 7. We have heard the Ld. Authorized representatives for both parties, perused the orders of the lower authorities and the material available on record, and considered the judicial pronouncements that have been pressed into service by the Ld. AR to drive home his contentions. 8. Admittedly, it is a matter of fact borne from the record that the assessee, i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e find that the A.O had merged the assessment proceedings initiated by the A.O vide notice u/s 143(2), dated 03.09.2014 AND those initiated on the basis of notice u/s 148, 14.01.2016, and passed a common order u/s 143(3), dated 31/03/2016. Reference of the return of income filed by the assessee in response to notice u/s 148, dated 14.01.2016 is mentioned in the order passed by the A.O u/s 143(3), dated 31/03/2016. 7. 29.03.2018 Notice u/s 148 of the Act, dated 29/03/2018 issued by ITOWard 1(2), Raipur. 8. 22.09.2018 Return of income filed by the assessee disclosing income of Rs. 34,79,020/- (i.e as originally assessed by A.O vide order passed u/s 143(3), dated 31/03/2016). 9. 31.03.2010 Assessment order u/s. 144/147 was passed wherein LTCG of Rs. 64,47,476/- on transfer of the property was brought to tax. As the assessee had already disclosed the LTCG of Rs. 32,29,238/- in his return of income filed in response to the notice u/s. 148 of the Act dated 14.01.2016, and the same had been assessed by the A.O while framing the orig ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue notice u/s. 148 2013-14 There is credible information in possession that assessee Shri Vijay Tandon has sold a piece of plot admeasuring area of 2420 sq ft, situated at Near Vidya Hospital, Shenker Nagar Main Road, Raipur on 13.09.2012 to Smt Beena Manghani Smt Mahak Menghani for Rs 85 lacs. This sale must have attracted capital gains. However, assessee has filed his return of income for AY13-14 showing income of Rs. 2,54,513/- On perusal of the return so filed, it has been found that he has neither shown any income from capital gains nor he has claimed any exemption u/s 54 or any other relevant section from the income from Capital gains. Therefore, I have reason to believe that the above sum of Rs. 85,00,000/-, chargeable to tax, has escaped assessment for A.Y 2013-14 by reason of the failure on the part of assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for its assessment for AY 2013-14. Sd/- Raipur (Amrit Kumar) Dated 16.03.2018 ITO-3(1), Raipur 13. On a careful perusal of the aforesaid reasons to believe based on which concluded assessment of the assessee was reopened, it trans ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
