9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 262X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ideration at Rs. 39,000/- per share which is evident from the computation of the long term capital gains provided along with the return of the income. Thus the assessee has disclosed all facts truly and fully during the course of the regular assessment and therefore, there is a mere change of opinion on the part of the respondent to issue the impugned notice based upon the information received from the CIT Appeals. The respondent has issued the impugned notice on the borrowed satisfaction without application of mind contrary to the material and facts available on record and therefore such notice cannot be sustained in view of the dictum of Kelvinator of India Ltd [ 2010 (1) TMI 11 - SUPREME COURT] - Decided in favour of assessee. - HONOUR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the statement of income after availing the exemption under Section 54 EC of the Act amounting to Rs. 1 Crore. 4.2. The return of income filed by the petitioner was selected for scrutiny and the regular assessment order under Section 143 (3) of the Act was passed on 02.03.2015 by the Assessing Officer after calling for and detailed scrutiny of the documents relating to the lump sum capital gain on sale of the shares. 4.3. The Assessing Officer after considering the material available on record had assessed the income of Rs. 2,87,91,295/- for the assessment year which included the long term capital gains amounting to Rs. 2,64,90,151/-. 4.4. It appears that the Principal CIT Ahmedabad- 4 initiated proceedings under Section 263 of the Act by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e applicability of Section 50B of the Act, the impugned notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued proposing to reassess the total income. 4.10. The petitioner filed a return pursuant to the notice under Section 148 of the Act on 04.04.2019 declaring the same income and by letter dated 10.04.2019 sought for the copy of the reasons recorded from the respondent. 4.11. The respondent uploaded the copy of the reasons recorded for reopening by letter dated 09.04.2019. The petitioner on receipt of the reasons filed objections vide letter dated 18.04.2019 followed by letter dated 14.10.2019 before the respondent. 4.12. The respondent rejected the objections filed by the petitioner vide order dated 07.12.2019. Being aggrieved the petitioner has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r and Lilamani Builders and The Ahmedabad Victorial Iron Works Company Ltd. was not placed before the Assessing Officer. It was submitted that as per the MOU, the value at which the shares were to be sold by the petitioner was Rs. 39,000/- whereas the valuation provided by the petitioner is Rs. 32,866/- and therefore the assessee did not disclose all the facts before the Assessing Officer resulting into reason to believe that income has escaped assessment and hence the impugned notice is issued beyond four years, the proviso to Section 147 would not apply. 6.1. Learned Senior Standing Counsel Mr. Patel further would submit that the petitioner would have an alternative remedy to challenge the assessment order which would be passed pursuant t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
