9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (10) TMI 227X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase. 2. That the notice dt. 20th Jan., 2001, issued under s. 158BD of the IT Act, 1961, for the block period 1st April, 1985 to 5th Dec., 1995, is without jurisdiction, misplaced, bad and contrary to law. The notice required has not been served on the deceased Smt. Dampati Devi in accordance with law, as such assessment framed is liable to be annulled on his count alone. 3. That the learned Dy. CIT is not justified in framing assessment on the appellant under s. 158BC(c) of the IT Act, 1961, for the block period 1st April, 1985 to 5th Dec., 1995. The assessment framed is erroneous, time-barred and untenable. 4. That the learned Dy. CIT has framed assessment in haste without giving adequate and reasonable opportunity to the appellant t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that a search was conducted at the premises of M/s Lachman Dass Jaspal Singh, Mansa. During the course of search, an agreement executed on 23rd July, 1990, was found, according to which Smt. Dampati Devi W/o Sh. Ishar Dass, Mansa, had agreed to sell plot of land against receipt of full and final consideration of Rs. 1,88,000 from Sh. Lachman Dass of Mansa. According to the AO Smt. Dampati Devi had purchased that property for Rs. 33,750 on 29th June, 1989, and as such the capital gains of Rs. 1,54,250 was required to be assessed in her hands. The AO issued notice to Smt. Dampati Devi under s. 158BD of the IT Act, 1961, for the block period 1st April, 1985 to 5th Dec., 1995 on 20th Jan., 2000, requiring the assessee to file the return of inco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons were tendered in the case of Sh. Lachman Dass in whose case addition of Rs. 1,88,000 was made on account of unexplained investment in the purchase of property for the financial year 1989-90 relevant to the asst. yr. 1990-91. The AO further stated that Sh. Lachman Dass duly accepted the aforesaid addition by paying tax under the K.V.S.S. He, therefore, added a sum of Rs. 1,54,250 as undisclosed income in the hands of assessee for the financial year 1989-90 in the block period 1st April, 1985 to 5th Dec., 1995. For the remaining years involved in the block period, the income was taken at nil. In this manner, the total undisclosed income was assessed at Rs. 1,54,250. 4. Now, the assessee is in appeal. The learned counsel for the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... disclosed the capital gains in the return filed in Form 2B for the block period under consideration, as such the AO was justified in treating the income of Rs. 1,54,250 as undisclosed income of the assessee. 6. After considering the rival submissions, we are of the view that there is some merit in this contention of the learned counsel for the assessee that the document was not (sic) related to the financial year 1990-91 relevant to the asst. yr. 1991-92 in which year, the alleged agreement deed was executed. It is also noticed that the sole basis for making the addition by the AO was that Sh. Lachman Dass agreed to the addition of Rs. 1,88,000 for the financial year 1989-90 relevant to the asst. yr. 1990-91. On the basis of that fact al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
