JINDAL DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION TRUST,GANDHIDHAM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-2, AHMEDABAD
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
“SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
BEFORE: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 377 & 378/Ahd/2025
(Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year : 2010-11)
Jindal Development
Foundation Trust
C/o. Atul Jindal, 101, Kachh
Arcade, National Highway
8-A, Mithi Rohar,
Gandhidham, Gujarat -
370201
बनाम
Vs.
The Assistant
Commissioner of Income
Tax (Exemption)-2
Ahmedabad
Öथायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAATJ9812D
(Appellant)
..
(Respondent)
अपीलाथȸ ओर से /Appellant by :
Shri Vimal Desai, A.R.
Ĥ×यथȸ कȧ ओर से/Respondent by :
Shri Ravindra, Sr. DR
Date of Hearing
06/05/2025
Date of Pronouncement
09/05/2025
(आदेश)/ORDER
PER SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, AM:
These two appeals relate to the same assessee ,filed by it against separate orders passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre
ITA Nos. 377 & 378/Ahd/2025 [Jindal Development
Foundation Trust vs. ACIT] A.Y. 2010-11 - 2 –
(hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”) of even date 23-12-2024, one in quantum proceedings confirming the addition made to the income of the assessee in assessment framed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 1437
of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) and the other confirming penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act , both pertaining to Assessment Year (A.Y) 2010-11. 2. We shall first take up the assessee’s appeal arising in quantum proceedings in ITA No.377/Ahd/2025. ITA No.377/Ahd/2025. A.Y 10-11
The grounds raised by the assesse are as under:
“1
The order passed u/s 143(3) rws 144 is bad in law as well as on facts:
2
The learned AO erred in law as well as on facts in re- opening the assessment under section 147 without there being any income chargeable to tax which had escaped the assessment. The Hon'ble CIT(A) has erred in confirming the same.
3
The learned AO erred in law as well as on facts by re- opening the assessment without having a reason to believe that income has escaped the assessment. The Hon'ble CIT(A) has erred in confirming the same.
4
The learned AO erred in law as well as on facts in passing the order u/s. 144 of the Act without taking into account all relevant material available on record. The Hon'ble CIT(A) has erred in confirming the same.
ITA Nos. 377 & 378/Ahd/2025 [Jindal Development
Foundation Trust vs. ACIT] A.Y. 2010-11 - 3 –
5
The learned AO erred in making addition of Rs. 24,23,000
with respect to sales of land without any material on record which proves that appellant has sold the land. The Hon'ble
CIT(A) has erred in confirming the same.”
Ld. Counsel for the assessee first took up Ground Nos. 1, 2 & 3 for making his argument challenging the validity of the assessment framed u/s.147 of the Act in the present case.
He pointed out from the assessment order that the AO assumed juri iction to reopen the case of the assessee and frame assessment u/s.147 r.w.s. 148 of the Act, on the belief that income earned by the assessee on a transaction of sale of an immoveable property had escaped assessment since the said transaction had not being disclosed by the assessee in the return of income filed. Ld. Counsel for the assessee pointed out that in the assessment order itself the AO noted that he had conducted independent enquiry from the Sub-