Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (8) TMI 186

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he owner of the such property and thereby has assumed the jurisdiction to reopen the assessment on the basis of the difference between the market value of the property and the registration value. It appears that the AO while disposing of the objections, has not considered the objections raised by the petitioner to the effect that there is no escapement of income as the difference between the value for stamp duty and the value of registration shown in the document cannot be taxed in any of the provisions of the Act. There is no information available with the AO which has a direct nexus with the income which is alleged to have been escaped. The petitioner has also disclosed fully and truly all material facts and therefore, as per proviso to s .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sons were supplied on 25.05.2016. The petitioner filed objections on 22.06.2016. The assessment was framed on 03.10.2016 under section 143 (3) read with section 147 accepting the return income. 5.2 Thereafter, once again, notice under section 133 (6) of the Act was issued on 19.02.2020 seeking information regarding transfer of property (plots of land) by the petitioner at a value lower than the market value. 5.3 The petitioner received the impugned notice dated 16.03.2020 under section 148 of the Act. The assessee filed reply to the notice under section 133 (6) on 15.07.2020 explaining in detail that the property was transferred in the year 1995 and therefore, the comparison of price of transfer of the year 1995 with market value of year 20 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ere executed and the amount of booking collected in the year 1995. 8.2 It was further pointed out that the petitioner-Company has shown the property in question i.e. plots of land as stock-in-trade in the name of the scheme- Radhe Arce as per the development agreement entered into between the Shantinagar (Shela) Cooperative Housing Society and the petitioner. It was also pointed out that the land of the project was purchased by the society and by virtue of the development agreement, the petitioner collected the amount from members on behalf of the society for work to be performed. 8.3 It was submitted that section 43CA of the Act was not on Statute for the year under consideration and as the petitioner was not the owner of the land in quest .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ner, though may be a developer, has discharged the function of an owner. 10. Having heard learned advocates for the respective parties, it appears that the respondent-Assessing Officer has misinterpreted the provision of section 50C of the Act. It would therefore be germane to refer to the reasons recorded which reads as under: Copy of Reasons Recorded:- The assessee company has filed the return of income on 30.04.2016 declaring the total income at Rs. Nil. The re-open scrutiny was finalized u/s. 143 (3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act 1961 on 03.10.2016 at assessed income at Rs. 79,93,170/-. With reference to the information received regarding the high value transaction, the assessee company has entered into sale of the property(ies) as p .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of accounts of the assessee company and are not declared by the assessee company in its return of income. As discussed above, I have reason to believe that there are escape income of Rs. 64,27,100/- and this is the fit case for the re-opening u/s. 147 of the Income Tax Act,1961. 11. From the above reasons, it appears that the respondent-Assessing Officer has considered the registration of sale of the plot of land as if the petitioner is the owner of the such property and thereby has assumed the jurisdiction to reopen the assessment on the basis of the difference between the market value of the property and the registration value. 12. It appears that the Assessing Officer while disposing of the objections, has not considered the objections .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates