9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (10) TMI 16X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... viously it is not a relevant material so far as re-assessment proceedings are concerned – notice u/s 147 scrapped. - 370 & 372 of 2003 - - - Dated:- 8-10-2009 - Hon'ble Prakash Krishna , J. and Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Nigam, J. Petitioner's Counsels - Rakesh Ranjan Agrawal Respondent's Counsel - C.S.C., A. N. Mahajan, Ashok Kumar , Bharat Ji Agarwal, D. Awasthi , G. Krishna, R.K. JUDGMENT Challenging the validity of notice issued under section 147 of Income Tax Act relating to the assessment years 1997-1998 and 1998-1999, the present writ petition has been filed. The petitioner is a company registered under the provisions of Indian Companies Act. The petitioner-company started construction of building at Village Akel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ome filed on 20.11.97 showing income at Rs.Nil (Proceed at 1,37,698.00). The Assessee filed Balance Sheet and as per Balance Sheet Investment in construction of property (House Bldg.) shown at Rs.1,18,74.000.00 during the financial year. The detailed investment in the Bldg. Situated at Akelwa, Varanasi up to Aug 1998 shown by the assessee at Rs. 1, 94,33,750.00. The matter was referred to the valuation cell, and D.V.O Kanpur vide his report dated 14.01.2000 estimated the cost of construction at Rs.2,86,03,911.00 year wise investment as per assessee and D.V.O's report given below: Year ending Amount as per Assessee Amount as per D.V.O Difference F.Y.96-97 1,18,74.000.00 1,75,31,574.00 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re-assessment proceedings. He submits that a report from the D.V.O can be obtained only for a limited purpose for computation of capital gains and not otherwise. Reliance was placed on a decision of Apex Court in Smt. Amiya Bala Paul versus Commissioner of Income Tax 2003 U.P.T.C 1181. Shri Ashok Kumar, learned standing counsel for the Department on the other hand submits that the sufficiency of material in possession of the assessing officer to form a belief that the income of the petitioner has escaped assessment. He submits that the sufficiency of reasons cannot be gone into the present writ petition. Reliance was placed by him on a Division Bench decision of this Court in Smt. Shashi Jain versus Income Tax Officer and another ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t in the case of Amia Bala Paul (Supra). The case on hand is indisputably not a case for computation of capital gains. The dispute relates with regard to the investment in the building made by the petitioner-company during the relevant assessment years. Shri Ashok Kumar, learned standing counsel could not place any material before us to take a different view of matter. He expressed his helplessness in the matter, in view of above authoritative pronouncement by the Apex Court In view of the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Smt.Amia Bala Paul (Supra), no reference to the Valuation Cell could have been made for the purposes of determining the investment made by the petitioner in the building. It therefore, follows that the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
