9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (4) TMI 1324X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... made by the assessee relating to investment in property at Panchsheel Park, New Delhi, the present writ petition is allowed. - Hon'ble Ms. Justice Rity Bahari And Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Manisha Batra For the Petitioner : Ms. Rashika Suri, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Abhinav Narang, Advocate For the Respondent : Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal, Sr. Standing Counsel JUDGMENT RITU BAHARI, J. (oral) 1. This petition has been filed seeking quashing of the notice dated 31.03.2021 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Annexure P-1) and the order dated 23.11.2021 (Annexure P-7) whereby, objections filed to the reasons recorded under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 have been dismissed. 2. The brief facts of the present case are that the petitioner-assessee is a company incorporated on 24.02.1988 under the Companies Act, 1956 having its registered office at Bhai Mohan Singh Nagar, Railmajra, Tehsil Balachaur, Nawanshar, Punjab engaged in the business of manufacturing and sale of BOPP metalized films, BOPP unmetalized films, thermal lamination and leather finishing foil. The petitioner-assessee filed its return of income for assessment year 2014-15 on 29.11.2014 declaring a los ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sheet, account statements, books of accounts etc. to the Assessing Officer (AO) from which it became clear that the assessee had fully and truly disclosed all relevant facts to the AO, however, the AO never raised any query during the assessment proceedings, and suddenly after a gap of four years, issued notice on the basis of information received from insight portal and also had not provided the information of the same to the petitioner and without conducting any independent inquiry, re-opened the case of the petitioner-assessee. The petitioner-assessee also filed a reply dated 01.11.2021 before the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax. Copy of the reply dated 01.11.2021 and copy of the e-mail showing the attachment are annexed as Annexures P-5 P-6, respectively. 6. The respondent after considering the objections/reply and the submissions of the petitioner-assessee, dismissed the objections filed by the petitioner-assessee vide order dated 23.11.2021 (Annexure P-7). It is submitted that the respondent ignored the fact that the petitioner actually purchased the property in assessment year 2015-16 and not in assessment year 2014-15. The petitioner in assessment year 2015-16 showed the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Limited was having its registered office at Balachaur, Nawan Shahar. Post approval of the scheme of arrangement by the Punjab and Haryana High Court vide Petition No.57 of 2015, some business of erstwhile Max India (PAN AABCM1204G) got demerged into two entities i.e. Max Ventures and Taurus Ventures (AAFCT2098H) whereas remaining business was continued with erstwhile Max India (AABCM1204G). 10. As per the approved scheme of 2015, investments made by erstwhile Max India (now Max Financial AABCM1204G) in Neeman which formed part of the Health and allied activities business / Allied Health and Associated Activities Business shall be part of Taurus Ventures (later on renamed as Max India with PAN AAFCT2098H). 11. Further, in a subsequent scheme of arrangement approved by the NCLT, Mumbai in 2020, the businesses of Max India, erstwhile Taurus Ventures (PAN AAFCT2098H) got demerged whereby the Health and Allied Activities Business / Allied Health and Associated Activities Business and related litigation got merged with Advaita Allied Health Services Limited with PAN AARCA8316K. This company Advaita was later on renamed as Max India (PAN AARCA8316K). 12. As a result of above schemes, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion qua petitioner-assessee was put on portal on ITBA systems on 27.03.2021 and immediately thereafter, notice under Section 147/148 was issued on 31.03.2021, within limitation. 18. The petitioner has shown NIL investment in ITR filed for assessment year 2014-15 (Annexure R-1) and nothing was shown by the petitioner in additions to fixed assets in its reply dated 04.11.2016 (Annexure R-2) which was filed during the course of assessment proceedings. The petitioner has made part payment in the year 2014-15 and final payment was in the year 2015-16 and during the entire assessment proceedings, the petitioner did not state about the fact of purchasing the immovable property at Panchsheel Park, New Delhi i.e. House No.31 which has a transaction value of Rs. 24.50 crores. In this backdrop, the proceedings under Section 147/148 of the Act have rightly been initiated. 19. On 15.03.2023, the counsel for the petitioner informed that petitioner after purchasing the property in Panchsheel Park, New Delhi in June 2014 and after making the entire payments, sale deed was reflected in its return for the year 2015-16 and the return filed by the petitioner had been accepted by the revenue. The case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oss of shares of M/s Neeman Medical International under the head of LTCG STCG. 22. In paragraph 4, it has been clarified again that the assessee had shown investment in property (cost of building given on operating lease) at Rs. 2,731.65 Lakhs during the financial year 2014-15 relevant to the assessment year 2015-16 under the head Non-current Investment (Note-11) in the financial statements of the Company. 23. After going through the aforesaid affidavit, it has been clarified that with respect to the assessment order for the year 2015-16, the assessment proceedings have been completed now vide order dated 27.09.2021 and no adverse order with respect to the investment made as per the sale deed (Annexure P-8) has been passed. 24. Since, the income tax for the year 2015-16 has also undergone the process of revision and the claim of petitioner with respect to the investment made on the cost of investment in the property has been accepted, no case is made out to re-open the assessment proceedings of the year 2014-15 on the same ground. 25. Keeping in view the fact that for the income tax return for the year 2014-15, there was no concealment of income made by the assessee relating to inv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
