9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (12) TMI 987X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at as the flat was a residential flat and in the same year petitioner had purchased another flat, no income was chargeable to tax - HELD THAT:- On the working of the short term capital gain for the flat sold, the Assessing Officer came to a finding that taxable capital gain was Rs. 13,64,000/-. But strangely in the impugned order dated 29th March 2023 issued under Section 148A(d) of the Act, the Assessing Officer proceeded further on the basis as regards the two immovable properties purchased by the assessee, the assessee has submitted that, she has purchased only one property for the consideration of Rs. 35,00,000/- . What we find difficult to digest is even in the notice issued u/s 148A(b) or the information annexed thereto, nowhere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... computed within four weeks thereafter. Even if petitioner feels the computation is wrong, the amount will be paid and thereafter, petitioner may take such steps as advised in accordance with law to impugn the computation of income. - K. R. SHRIRAM DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr. Tanmay M. Phadke. For the Respondents Revenue : Mr. Ajeet Manwani a/w. Ms. Samiksha Kanani. P.C. : 1. It is petitioner s case that petitioner (assessee), during the Financial Year 2015-2016 pertaining to Assessment Year 2016-2017, had sold a residential flat for Rs. 36.51 lakhs and purchased another residential flat for Rs. 35 lakhs. Petitioner has been candid in admitting that though the residential flat sold during th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 5 lakhs loan from petitioner s brother and Rs. 30 lakhs by way of home loan disbursed on various dates. Copy of petitioner s brother s bank statement as well as housing loan statement was also made available. 4. On the working of the short term capital gain for the flat sold, the Assessing Officer came to a finding that taxable capital gain was Rs. 13,64,000/-. But strangely in the impugned order dated 29th March 2023 issued under Section 148A(d) of the Act, the Assessing Officer proceeded further on the basis as regards the two immovable properties purchased by the assessee, the assessee has submitted that, she has purchased only one property for the consideration of Rs. 35,00,000/- . Paragraphs 2 to 6 of the impugned order read ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned and Capital gain of Rs. 15,10,200/- remains undisclosed for A.Y. 2016-17 thereby escaping assessment in the hands of assessee. 5. What we find difficult to digest is even in the notice issued under Section 148A(b) of the Act or the information annexed thereto, nowhere does it state petitioner has purchased two properties for Rs. 70 lakhs. Petitioner has provided documents to justify that petitioner has purchased only one property for Rs. 35 lakhs and also has explained the source of funding. If the Assessing Officer has to say that there are two properties purchased, either erroneously the figure of Rs. 35 lakhs is doubled and shown as Rs. 70 lakhs in the AIS, or the Assessing Officer should provide the details of the second proper ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
