NAVEEN GEHLOT,KOTA vs. PR.CIT, UDAIPUR

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 14/JP/2021 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2015-16 cuke Naveen Gehlot Pr. Commissioner of Vs. Flat No. E-3, Vallabham Apartment Income Tax, Udaipur Valabhbari, Gumanpura Kota, Rajasthan LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AFVPG 6240 A vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Dinesh Kumar (Adv.) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Sh. Saroj Dubey(CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 12/04/2022 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 28/04/2022 vkns'k@ ORDER PER: RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM

This appeal filed by the assessee is arising out of an order passed by the Pr. Commissioner of Income tax, Udaipur dated 22-02-2021 for the assessment year 2015-16. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:-

“1. Because on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax erred in assuming jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Act, whereas the mandatory condition for assuming jurisdiction are totally absent with the result that the impugned order passed under Section 263 of the Act is bad in law.

2. Because the Learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax has erred in assuming jurisdiction and reopening the assessment of the Appellant without there being any violation of the liberal provisions of Section 54 of the Act which otherwise are settled by literal construction as well as judicial precedents.

3. That the Learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax has grossly erred in holding that deduction claimed under the head of capital gains have been erroneously allowed by AO without proper enquiry and verification whereas the assessee was duly assessed under the provisions of Section 143(3) which in itself bars the exercise of provisions of Section 263 without cogent reasons. Moreover, the same is patently change of opinion which otherwise is not permitted. 4. That further submissions shall be made at the time of hearing. 5. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter all or any of grounds of appeal and relief claimed before or at the time of hearing.”

3 Naveen Gehlot, Kota vs. Pr.CIT, Udaipur 3. That in the meanwhile, the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi has proceeded with the assessment proceedings in pursuance of the order of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Udaipur dated 22.2.2021 and has now passed as assessment order dated 29.3.2022 under Section 143(3) read with Section 263 of the Act accepting the return of income as assessed in order dated 27.12.2017 under Section 143(3) of the Act. The Assessment Order dated 29.3.2022 is annexed herewith. It is therefore requested that the said order may kindly be taken on record and appropriate order while deciding the appeal may kindly be passed.”

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed.