Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE
Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO & SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY
ORDER
PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM:
This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 5, Pune [‘CIT(A)’ for short] dated 17.03.2016 for the assessment year 2007-08.
The appellant raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Assessing Officer have erred in reopening the assessment u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the basis of search action u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the case of Group”. Under such situation, Learned Assessing Officer ought to have preceded u/s 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the action of reopening the assessment u/s 147 is thus, bad in law and deserves to be struck down.
2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Assessing Officer have erred in reopening the assessment u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by disregarding appellant objection in which it was categorically pointed out that presumption of alleged escapement of income does not exist when it was clarified that there was no transaction of the appellant with the said “Marvel Group”, in the impugned year. Without prejudice to the above grounds, your appellants intends to raise following grounds on merit.
3. On the facts and in the circumstances of case and in law, the Learned Assessing Officer erred in making an addition of Rs. 10,00,000/-, u/s 69 of Income Tax Act, as unexplained investment merely on basis of eternal evidence and by disregarding the appellant’s submission in this regard.
4. On the facts and in circumstances of case and in law, the Learned Assessing Officer erred in changing the interest u/s 234 B of Income Tax Act, without considering the fact that appellant could not have apprehended the liability to pay tax at time of payment of advance tax. The appellant craves for to leave, add, alter, modify, delete above ground of appeal before or at the time hearing, in the interest of natural justice.”
3. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is an individual engaged in the business of deals and sales of securities. Originally, the return of income for the assessment year 2007-08 was filed on 30.10.2007 declaring total income of Rs.14,67,245/-. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the Assessing Officer vide order dated 22.12.2009 passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) at total income of Rs.48,38,710/-. Subsequently, on receipt of the information from the Investigation Wing of the Department that the appellant had paid on-money consideration of Rs.10,00,000/- in cash on 11.05.2006 to Marvel Group at the time of booking of flat, the Assessing Officer formed an opinion that the income had escaped assessment to tax and, accordingly, issued a notice u/s 148 on 19.03.2012. In response, it was submitted that the original return of income filed be treated as return of income in response to notice u/s 148 of the Act. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the Tax Recovery Officer, Range-2, Pune (‘the Assessing Officer’) vide order dated 25.03.2013 passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act after making an addition of Rs.10,00,000/- on account of alleged payment of on-money consideration to Marvel Group at the time of booking of Flat No.701 on 11.05.2006. Briefly, the factual matrix of this case are as follows : There was search and seizure operations under the provisions of section 132 of the Act in the case of Marvel Group on 22.05.2008. During the course of search and seizure operations, certain documents were seized and impounded, which according to the Assessing Officer Rs.10,00,000/- in cash on 11.05.2006 at the time of booking of a flat in the name of wife of the appellant, namely, Mrs. Vidisha Bajoria. Copy of the seized documents were also submitted to the appellant who, in turn, had denied having paid any on-money consideration in cash to the Marvel Group by stating that he had booked a flat only on 29.09.2010 and the consideration for the purchase of the flat was paid by Cheque. However, the Assessing Officer was of the opinion that the consideration was paid in cash on 11.05.2006 to Marvel Group at the time of booking of flat in the name of wife of the appellant, Mrs. Vidisha Bajoria.
Being aggrieved by the above action of the Assessing Officer, an appeal was preferred before the ld. CIT(A), who vide impugned order confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer.
Being aggrieved by the decision of the ld. CIT(A), the appellant is in appeal before us with the above extracted grounds of appeal
6. Ground of appeal no.1 and 2 challenges the validity of the jurisdiction u/s 147 of the Act. By stating that the impugned assessment order was passed on the incriminating material found