9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (12) TMI 923X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds taken by the assessee are hereby dismissed. Applicability of section 43CA - valuation of impugned sold out units as determined by the AO in terms of value determined by the stamp duty authority - whether agreement of sale was entered prior to applicability of the provision itself by the Finance Act, 2013 w.e.f. A.Y. 2014-15? - HELD THAT:- When the impugned order was passed by the ld. CIT(A) did not consider the DVO s report as available with him while passing the impugned order, we feel it necessary to remand back the instant issue to the file of AO with the direction to reconsider the valuation report furnished by DVO by applying proposition of law as laid down in the case of Maria Fernandes Cheryl vs ITO [ 2021 (1) TMI 620 - ITAT MUMBAI ] and also considering the documents as well as necessary submission made by the assessee before him and it is also directed that while doing so the ld. AO should give opportunity of being heard to the assessee. In terms of above, the instant issue is hereby allowed for statistical purposes. DVO s report in the case of assessee was furnished beyond the limitation period as prescribed under the law, therefore, the DVO s report cannot be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stion determined by the stamp duty authority was Rs. 6,52,96,309/-. Accordingly, the ld. AO found that difference of Rs. 1,74,72,940/- was under assessed in the hands of the assessee. The ld. AO after receiving the necessary objection from the assessee in this context reference was made to Departmental Valuation Officer for determination of the fair market value of property on 07.11.2017. However, before passing assessment order, ld. AO did not receive any such report from the DVO and accordingly difference amount of Rs. 1,74,72,940/- added to the income of the assessee by invoking the provision of section 50C r.w.s. 43CA of the Act. 3. Aggrieved by the order of assessing officer, assessee went into appeal before the ld. CIT(A) where the appeal of the assessee was dismissed. 4. Dissatisfied with the above order, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising multiple grounds of appeal. The first two issues raised by the assessee challenging the validity of notice issued u/s 143(2) of the Act by the ld. AO and also challenging the validity of the assessment order in absence of any effective order passed u/s 127 of the Act and prayed for set aside the order of authorities be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee, the notice u/s 143(2) had to be served on the assessee on 30.09.2019 by the assessing officer having jurisdiction over the assessee. In present case, notice u/s 143(2) was served on 29.07.2023 by the ITO, Ward-42(3), Murshidabad. The scrutiny in the instant case had to be initiated by issuance of notice u/s 143(2) within 30.09.2016 for the assessment year in question failing which the selection would have been barred by limitation. Moreover, the transfer of PAN jurisdiction from one officer to another involved some internal procedure which takes time. He further stated that in following manner: (e) As per section 119 of the Income-tax Act'1961 Board has issued instructions to subordinate authorities regarding income limits for assigning cases to DC/AC/ITO's vide Instruction No. 1/2011 |F.NO. 187/12/2010-IT(A-I)] dated 31-01-2011. In the said instruction the monetary limit has been assigned for ITO/ACIT for completion of scrutiny and accordingly non corporate cases declaring return income above Rs. 15 Lakhs in non-metro charges were assigned to the ACITs. In the present case, the assessee's case has been transferred from ITO, Ward-42(3), Murshidabad to ACIT C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... revealed that Assessee had participated pursuant to notice issued u/s 142(1) and had not questioned jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer, Hon'ble Supreme Court held that in such case order of the High Court could not be sustained copy of the order is enclosed herewith for kind reference enclosed as Annexure A . 6. We after considering the submission of the parties and going through the material available on record, we notice that the present issues are covered against the assessee in view of the Hon ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of Kalinga Institute of Industrial Technology (supra) where the Hon ble Supreme Court held that when assessee had participated pursuance to the notice issued u/s 142(1) and had not questioned the jurisdiction of the assessing officer as per section 124(3)(a) of the I.T. Act precludes the assessee from questioning the jurisdiction of the assessing officer. While going through the present facts of the case and issue involved, we find that assessee has never raised any question before the AO challenging the jurisdiction of AO within 30 days of receipt of notice u/s 142(1) of the Act as well as transfer of jurisdiction u/s 127 of the Act. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
