9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 1169X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the validity of the 263 based on the information supplied by the AO are found to be defective and accordingly the above submission is dismissed. Prayer of the assessee that the initiation of proceedings u/s 147 of the Act was sanctioned by the ld. PCIT-21 whereas the present proceedings were initiated by ld. PCIT-12 - As observed that from the order passed by the ld. PCIT and the proposal was submitted by the Assessing Officer before present ld. PCIT-12, it shows that the ld. PCIT has initiated proceedings u/s 263 with the clear observation that during recovery proceedings, the AO found that the assessee had sold immovable properties and also leased out the property at Gurgaon. The abovesaid facts were found to be correct and also the same was accepted by the assessee before the authorities. AO has brought to the notice of ld. PCIT-12 and accordingly, the proceedings initiated show that the jurisdiction of the AO lies with ld. PCIT-12. The relevant assessment order was passed on 28.12.2018 and at that point of time, jurisdiction may be with ld. PCIT-21 and accordingly the same was approved and now the present proceedings were initiated on 22.02.2021. AO has approached ld. PC ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... allowance 1,19,46,609/- Total Income 1,19,46,609/- Rounded off 1,19,46,610/- 3. While verifying the assessment records, ld. PCIT, Delhi 12, Delhi observed that there was information on NMS that assessee had made cash deposit in his bank account and also made share transactions but no return of income was filed. Accordingly, the case was reopened but the assessee has not filed any return of income in response to notice issued u/s 148 of the Act. Accordingly, the assessment was completed with taxable income of Rs. 1,19,46,610/- and tax demand of Rs. 90,63,830/- was raised. He observed that during the recovery proceedings, it was observed that assessee had sold immovable properties and the income/gain arising from the sale of properties was not disclosed by the assessee nor being assessed by the AO. It was also found that the assessee has sold immovable properties at value less than the value assessed by stamp valuation authority for the purpose of stamp duty. Further it was observed that assessee has given property in Gurgaon for lease for Rs. 8 lakhs per month and the same was not offered to tax. Considering the above facts on record, ld. PCIT observed that the assessment orde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... records of the assessee are stuck up in the hand of liquidator and time is needed for procuring information from liquidator as well as sub-Registrar, Gurugram. Assessee is informed if any fee if the same is required under the provision of the law. It is prayed that case may please be adjourned for next date of hearing as per your convenience." 5. After considering the submissions of the assessee, ld. PCIT observed that assessee in her letter dated 08.03.2021 furnished the computation of short term/long term capital gain in respect of three properties. Now, ld. AR of the assessee states that assessee does not have records of the sale of properties. Therefore, ld. PCIT observed that the conduct of the assessee is not reliable and not accepted and he observed that the assessee wants to just linger on the proceedings which is time barring on 31.03.2021. Accordingly, based on the information available on record, ld. PCIT treated the assessment order passed u/s 144 read with section 147 of the Act both erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue and sustained the additions made by the AO in the earlier order as well as new findings based on the own submissions of the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se while directing the AO to hold such illegal and impugned additions under LTCG & STCG because the same are only required to be calculated and to have been made by the AO independently as per the provisions of law contained u/s 45 r.w.s. 54 and 54F of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which cannot directed to be taxed immediately on its sale thereof. 6. That the order passed is unconstitutional under the law and to the facts of the case, because of not covered under Explanation-2 of Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as has been referred at Page No.7 of Para-13.2 of such order and the appellant assails her rights to amend, alter or change any grounds of appeal of any time even during the course of hearing of instant appeal. It is therefore, prayed: PRAYER: 1. That the order passed u/s 263 on 26.03.2021 may please be quashed its illegality and infirmity appearing therein, under the law and to the facts of the case, which its consequential directions also given to the AO to pass further order having its effect thereof. 2. That any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may please be deems fit and proper on the facts and in the circumstances of the case. It is prayed accor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he submitted that due to sealing of factory premises, the assessee was not in a position to file the return of income. 10. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. We observed that assessee is a non-filer of income tax return and notice was issued u/s 148 of the Act requiring the assessee to file the return of income, however assessee has not filed any return of income and due to non-compliance, the assessment was completed u/s 144 read with section 147 of the Act. Subsequently, in the recovery proceedings, the AO came to know that assessee has also sold three properties and not declared the same for tax and also leased out a property at Gurgaon with monthly rent of Rs. 8 lakhs. Based on the above information, he brought to the notice of the ld. PCIT by filing a letter even though the letter was captioned as a proposal u/s 263 of the Act. Considering the fact on record and conduct of the assessee who was not complying for any of the notices issued by the Revenue, the AO has rightly brought to the notice of the ld. PCIT for direction and based on the above information, notice u/s 263 of the Act was issued to the assessee and in response to the above, assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s u/s 263 with the clear observation that during recovery proceedings, the AO found that the assessee had sold immovable properties and also leased out the property at Gurgaon. The abovesaid facts were found to be correct and also the same was accepted by the assessee before the authorities. It shows that the AO has brought to the notice of ld. PCIT-12 and accordingly, the proceedings initiated show that the jurisdiction of the AO lies with ld. PCIT-12. The relevant assessment order was passed on 28.12.2018 and at that point of time, jurisdiction may be with ld. PCIT-21 and accordingly the same was approved and now the present proceedings were initiated on 22.02.2021. We observed that the AO has approached ld. PCIT-12 to initiate the proceedings shows that the jurisdiction of the AO lies with ld. PCIT-12, therefore, the proceedings were initiated by the ld. PCIT-12. Therefore, now the assessee cannot raise this issue as critical and seeking for cancellation of the proceedings u/s 263 of the Act, in our view, is not justified and also we observed that even before ld. PCIT, the assessee has agreed to settle the dispute and still failed to submit any proper documents within the time f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
