9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 36X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... herefore, we are of the considered view that the re-opening of assessment is bad in law and the impugned assessment made by the AO cannot be sustained. Accordingly, on facts and circumstances of the present case, we are constrained to quash the impugned assessment. - Shri Kul Bharat, Judicial Member And Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Shri Ankit Gupta, Adv. For the Department : Shri Om Parkash, Sr. DR ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM: This appeal, by the assessee, is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Natioinal Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 30.07.2022, pertaining to the assessment year 2014-15. The assessee has raised following grounds of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in nature and without application of mind, hence, the proceedings are bad in law and illegal. The NFAC has upholding the same 8. That, the NFAC has erred in upholding the action of the assessing officer, in completing the re-assessment on Income of Rs. 38,33,369.00against the Return of Income declaring income of NIL. The additions/disallowances made at Rs. 35,72,539.00on account of Long term capital gain are illegal, unjust, highly excessive 9. That, the NFAC and Assessing officer has erred in making the addition/disallowance of Rs. 35,72,539.00on account of Long term Capital Gain which is highly arbitrary, unjustified and against the facts of the case. 10. That, the assessing officer as well as NFAC has erred in taking the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the material available on record 16. That the explanation given and evidence produced, material placed and available on record have not been properly considered and judicially interpreted and the same do not justify the additions/ allowances made. 17. The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter and or modify the grounds of appeal of the said appeal. 2. Facts, in brief, are that in this case the assessment was reopened u/s 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the Act and a notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 29.03.2018. In response to the notice the assessee filed return of income. However, thereafter there was no compliance on behalf of the assessee in respect of statutory notices. Therefore ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... We have heard learned representatives of the parties and perused the material available on record. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the notice u/s 148 was issued in individual capacity and the assessment was framed in the capacity of legal heir. Furthermore, interestingly, the AO in the reasons recorded has categorically mentioned the assessee as Smt. Raj Rani L/H Late Sh. Ashok Kumar Jain . However, in the notice u/s 148 the same AO writes Raj Rani w/o Ashok Kumar Jain and the assessee in response to such notice filed her return of income in the individual capacity. This fact is not rebutted by the Revenue. Since the notice does not meet the requirement of law, therefore, we are of the considered view that the re-openin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
