Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee challenged an assessment order and CIT(A) order, where the case was selected for scrutiny via a Section 148 notice concerning a Rs. 2.80 crore immovable property purchase, salary income, and a contract amount. The assessee contended that provisions of Section 69A were not applicable and that the Section 148 notice was invalid given the income threshold and a mandatory ITR filing threshold. The assessee further argued that the Assessing Officer failed to consider details submitted regarding the transactions.
Held
The Tribunal dismissed the assessee's ground regarding the validity of the Section 148 notice, finding it valid as the escaped income exceeded Rs. 50,00,000 and the assessee did not file an ITR. However, on merits, the Tribunal restored the issue of the immovable property transaction and other additions to the file of the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer for a 'De novo' adjudication, noting that the details furnished by the assessee were not considered by the AO.
Key Issues
The key issues were the validity of the notice under Section 148, the applicability of Section 69A regarding financial transactions, and whether the Assessing Officer properly considered the assessee's submissions regarding the alleged escaped income and property purchase.
Sections Cited
250, 143(3), 144B, 69A, 149(1)(a), 148, 139(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, A BENCH, PUNE
Before: Dr. MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
आदेश / ORDER
PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT Appeal (NFAC) u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 dated 08.09.2023 which is arising out of Order passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act dated 26.09.2022 framed by ITO assessment unit.
Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:-
1. Provisions of Sec 69A will not be applicable here, as the appellant is able to provide all the explanation akong with the supporting documentary evidence for francial transactions made during the FY 2012-13
2. As per see 149(1)(a), netice n's 148 cannot be issued after lapse of four years from the end of relevant Assessment Year, if the total income is Below Rs. 50,00,000 3.As por see 139(1), the filing of Income Tax Return is mandatory only when the total income exceeds maximum amount which is not chargeable to tax ie, Rs. 2,50,000/-
3. So far as legal issue raised by the assessee in ground No. 2 that notice u/s 148 of the Act cannot be issued after lapse of 4 years from the end of relevant Assessment Year which is A.Y. 2013-14, if the total income is below Rs. 50,00,000/- we notice that this ground raised by the assessee has no legs to stand because firstly assessee did not file return of income and secondly the disputed amount alleged to have escaped tax is Rs. 2,87,09,413/- (mentioned at Para 2.1 of the Assessment Order) and therefore since the income alleged to have escaped is more than Rs. 50,00,000/-, the notice u/s 148 issued in the instant case is valid and within the prescribed time. Thus ground No. 2 raised by the assessee is dismissed.
4. As regards grounds on merit, ground No. 1, at the outset Ld. counsel of the assessee claimed to have submitted all necessary details to explain alleged transaction of making investment in purchase of immovable property to Learned Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (Ld. JAO). However submission filed on 18.05.2023 to Ld. AO has not been considered and therefore prayer is made for restoring the issue on merit to the file of Ld. JAO.
Ld. DR was fair enough in not opposing this request.
We have heard rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. We note that the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act to carry out the assessment proceedings for examining the transaction of purchase of immovable property amounting Rs. 2.80 crores and also salary income of Rs. 70,010/- and the contract amount of Rs. 6,39,403/- Before us the assessee has furnished Paper Book running into 106 pages as well as covering letter stating that the alleged transaction of immovable property is not carried out in its personal capacity. He submitted that the assessee is only a Secretary in new Kolhapur Co-operative Bank and only his PAN was given for opening his Bank Account. Reference was also made to the Bank Statement placed at Page No. 60-61. He also submitted that complete details were filed before the AO on 18.05.2023 alongwith the news paper cutting, covering letter, requisite order from TAIN to society, society resolution, sale deed and Bank statement. This fact of filing the above details is duly verifiable from the e- proceedings Portal Sheet filed before us. We further note that in Para 2.6 of the Assessment Order, Ld. AO observed that the assessee has not made any submission in response to the letter issued. This apparently shows that details furnished by the assessee have not been considered by the AO and went unnoticed before making the impugned addition. Under these given facts and circumstances we deem it proper to restore all the issues raised on merits to the file of Ld. JAO for “De novo” adjudication which has to be carried out after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to assist and after duly examining the details filed before him and then decide in accordance with law. The assessee is also advised to remain vigilant and not to take unnecessary adjournment unless required for reasonable cause and also update the correct e- mail Id and mobile no. on the Income Tax Portal. Ground No. 1 is allowed for statistical purposes. Ground No. 3 is general and consequential in nature which needs no adjudication.
In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 04th day of April, 2025.