9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (11) TMI 36X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of relevant AY, i.e., AY 2016-17, and, therefore, are time-barred. HELD THAT:- We would have accepted the submission of Petitioner but for the fact that, concededly, the petitioner did not file his Income Tax Return. Therefore, according to us, the matter may require further inquiry. As said, before the AO proceeds further, he will give an opportunity to the petitioner to submit further documents in support of his defence (to which, we have made a broad reference hereinabove). AO will also deal with the stand of the petitioner that the subject property which was sold, was bought in and about 2010, at the price indicated hereinabove. AO will, in any event, deal Petitioner's submission that notwithstanding the fact that Retur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... perty. 6. Mr Nitin Gulati, who appears on behalf of the petitioner, does not dispute the fact that the subject immovable property was sold by the petitioner to two persons, i.e., Mr Sriram Jayaraman Subramanian and Ms Kamakshi Sriram Iyer for a cumulative amount of Rs. 1,20,25,000/-. 6.1 According to Mr Gulati, the petitioner had purchased the subject immovable property in 2010 for Rs. 75,45,096/-. 6.2 It is also Mr Gulati s submission that the purchase of the subject property was partly funded through a loan taken from ICICI Bank amounting to Rs. 67,26,641/-. The balance amount, we are told, was sourced through savings available with the petitioner. 6.3 The petitioner appears to have furnished the loan statement to the AO. 7 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , concededly, the petitioner did not file his Income Tax Return. 13. Therefore, according to us, the matter may require further inquiry. 14. That said, before the AO proceeds further, he will give an opportunity to the petitioner to submit further documents in support of his defence (to which, we have made a broad reference hereinabove). 15. The AO will also deal with the stand of the petitioner that the subject property which was sold, was bought in and about 2010, at the price indicated hereinabove. 16. Therefore, the AO will, in any event, deal with Mr Gulati s submission that notwithstanding the fact that Return of Income (ROI) had not been filed, the escaped income would not exceed Rs. 50,00,000/-. 17. This exercise will ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
