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 (10) TMI 487

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... otice u/s 143(2) of the Act and that also the scrutiny was only to the extent of large cash deposits. Notice u/s 142(1) also mentions transfer of property and not that of purchase of property. The assessee at the time the assessment proceedings has given details related to large cash deposits as well as transfer of property in the present Assessment Year. PCIT cannot invoke Section 263 when the assessee has given the detailed reply to the issue which was called upon by the AO not only that of notice u/s 143(2) of the Act but also after the issuance of notice under Section 142(1) of the Act. Thus, the Assessing Officer has passed the Assessment Order after taking into account all the relevant details and this cannot be said as erroneous or p .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rder u/s 263 as he could not have passed the order u/s 263, being taken the case for limited scrutiny under CASS and, therefore, the Pr. CIT has exceeded his jurisdiction in issuing the notice u/s 263 and passing the order u/s 263 (1). 2. That the order as passed by the Ld. Pr. CIT is against the norms laid down under the CBDT circular for limited scrutiny and having not raised the issue in the show cause notice with regard to issue under 'limited scrutiny case and raising other issues in the show cause notice under section 263 of the Act, is against the facts and circumstances of the case. Hence the order as passed by the Pr. CIT deserves to be quashed. 3. That the Ld. Pr. CIT has erred in law in assuming jurisdiction under section 263 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... T further observed that the assessee alongwith two co-owners had paid stamp duty of Rs. 7,90,800/- in respect of the said purchase. Therefore, fair market value of the property in accordance with its stamp duty value works out at Rs. 1,61,38,775/-. Hence, the fair market value of the entire property exceeded the claimed sales consideration by Rs. 1,02,37,775/-. The PCIT observed that the provisions of Section 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii) of the Act should have been attracted in respect of the purchase made by the assessee for immovable property for a consideration which is less than the stamp duty valuation of the property. Thus, the difference of Rs. 34,12,590/- was to be taxed in his hands being one third of assessee s share in total differential of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... or examination and such issues have to be communicated to the assessee in the notice under Section 143(2) of the Act. The Ld. AR further submitted that the issues/scope of Limited Scrutiny has to be specified in the notice under Section 143(2) of the Act and the format of notice has been notified by the CBDT vide Circular dated 11.07.2016. Validity of reopening stands or falls on the basis of reasons recorded, in the same way, scope of Limited Scrutiny stands on the basis of issues in the notice under Section 143(2) of the Act. Subsequent notice cannot cure the defect in the notice under Section 143(2) of the Act and also cannot expand scope of Limited Scrutiny. Any issue beyond the notice under Section 143(2) of the Act would be expansion .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 7.06.2017 during the assessment proceedings. Thus, the PCIT has rightly directed the Assessing Officer to verify and accordingly passed the fresh Assessment Order. 8. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. It is pertinent to note that Section 142(1) of the Act cannot extend the scope of defective notice under Section 143(2) of the Act as stated by the Ld. AR. In fact, this can only be extended through approval of PCIT which was not done in the present case. It is further noted that as per the notice under Section 143(2) of the Act and that also the scrutiny was only to the extent of large cash deposits. In fact, notice under Section 142(1) also mentions transfer of property and not that of .....

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