COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MEENA GUPTA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI . . ITA 137/2008 . COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant Through:Ms.P.L.Bansal, Adv. . versus . MEENA GUPTA ..... Respondent Through . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN B. LOKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.B. GUPTA . O R D E R 03.03.2008 The Revenue is aggrieved by an order dated 11th April, 2007 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Delhi Bench G in ITA No.414/Del/06 relevant for the assessment year 1997-1998 along with C.O.No.76/Del/2007. In this case notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued to the Assessee on the basis of reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer on 8th September, 2003. The reasons read as follows:- ? During the course of post search enquiries conducted by DDIT (Inv.) Gurgaon in the case of M/s R.K. Aggarwal and Co. (Prop Sh.Satish Goyal, 1748/55, Naiwala, Karol Bagh, New Delhi it was found that Ms.Meena Gupta, A-1/106, Paschim Vihar, New Delhi had received a payment Rs. 5,00,000/- + 5,00,000/- + 4,84,250/- = 14,84,250/- by . ITA 137/2008 Page 1 of 3 . cheque/draft bearing No.921291,926204 and 926209 from M/s. R.K.Aggarwal and Co which was issued from its bank account No.CA-3097, Corporation Bank, Karol Bagh, New Delhi and deposited by Ms.Meena Gupta in his Bank A/c. No.24774 with Canara Bank, Shakti Nagar, Delhi on 25/04/1996, 12/06/1996 and 19/06/1996. Further enquiries revealed that Ms.Meena Gupta had introduced the founds through accommodation entry in the form of profit earned on a/c of transaction of shares. These transactions has been shown as long term capital gains and have been claimed as exempted u/s 54F of IT. Act. No purchase or sale of shares have taken place. . As per our record there is no return of income filed by the Assessee for the assessment year 1997-98. Hence, I have reason to believe that a sum of Rs.14,84,250/- has escaped assessment. Hence, it is proposed to issue notice u/s 148 of the IT Act in this case for the assessment year 1997-98.? . A reading of these reasons show that the transactions that were under consideration had been shown by the Assessee as long term capital gain and were claimed as exempted under Section 54F of the Income Tax Act, 1961. . . Notwithstanding this, the Assessing Officer issued a notice on the ground that since no return was filed by the Assessee for the assessment year 1997-98 (the relevant assessment year), therefore, he has reason to believe that the transaction amount escaped assessment. The Tribunal noted as a matter of fact and, with which we agree, that there is no allegation by the Assessing Officer in the reasons recorded that there was a failure on the part of the Assessee to disclose material facts ITA 137/2008 Page 2 of 3 necessary for assessment. The actual assessment was made under Section 143(3) of the Act and the assessment order shows that the issue relating to the transaction which resulted in long term capital gains was discussed in the assessment order and the Assessing Officer was satisfied in respect of the capital gains declared by the Assessee. Under the circumstances, it was no case where the Assessee had not disclosed all the relevant facts. The original assessment order was passed on 31st March, 2000 and the period of limitation was to expire (for the assessment year 1997-98) on 31st March, 2002. The notice was issued to the Petitioner under Section 148 of the Act on 8th September, 2003. On these facts, the proviso to the Section 147 of the Act would not come to the rescue of the Revenue since all the relevant facts were disclosed by the Assessee. There is no merit in this appeal. Dismissed. . . MADAN B. LOKUR, J . . V.B. GUPTA, J MARCH 03, 2008 Bisht . . . ITA 137/2008 Page 3 of 3 .