SMT. KAMLESH GUPTA,LUCKNOW vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.A

For Respondent: Shri. Saurabh Dubey, CIT(DR)

PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.:

This appeal, by the assessee, is directed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 20.12.2022 pertaining to the assessment year 2014-15. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: -

“1. BECAUSE the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) was not correct in upholding the validity of notice u/s 143(2) dated 15.09.2015 issued on the basis of CASS methodology even through the said notice did not meet the requirement of law laid down in clause (ii) of sub-section (2) of section 143 of the Act. 1.2 BECAUSE on the facts and in the circumstances or the case, the decision of Hon’ble ITAT, Allahabad Bench in the case of Obeetee (Pvt.) Ltd., vs. The ACIT in and the subsequent decision of ITAT Lucknow Bench ‘SMC’ in the case of Veer Bahadur Singh Purvanchal University vs. Dy. CIT(Exemption) in are ipso facto applicable to the case in hand and as such the assessment order dated 29.12.2016 passed in pursuance of notice u/s 143(2) dated 15.09.2015 issued on the basis of CASS methodology deserves to be held as null and void.

Page 2 of 3 2. BECAUSE on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) was not correct in accepting only 16.77% of the construction cost claimed by the assessee for the previous year 2001-02, 2006-07 & 2007- 08 and in directing the Assessing Officer to work out the indexed cost accordingly instead of accepting the full cost of construction claimed by the assessee for the above mentioned previous years.

3. BECAUSE while accepting only part of the construction cost for various years, the ld. CIT(A) has overlooked the material and information as well as the affidavit of the appellant placed before him in support of the construction cost claimed for Previous year 2001-02, 2006-07 and 2007- 08.

4. BECAUSE merely due to an in-advertent mistake in mentioning the lesser constructed area of the property (sold by the assessee) in the sale deed, the assessee’s claim for the actual constructed area and construction cost could not have been denied and keeping in view the material and information including the sworn affidavit of the assessee placed on record, the ld. CIT(A) ought to have accepted the entire cost of construction and actual constructed area claimed by the assessee for F.Y. 2001-02, 2006-07 and 2007-08.

5. BECAUSE the ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order on presumption, conjecture and surmises, without appreciating the evidences placed before him during the course of appellate proceedings.

6. BECAUSE the order appealed against is contrary to the facts, law and Principles of natural justice.”

2. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the dispute has been settled under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 and prayed for withdrawal of the appeal. And a letter dated 06.12.2024 along with Form no. 2 is placed on record. The relevant contents of the letter dated 06.12.2024 is reproduced as under: - “The aforesaid appeal, which is fixed for hearing on 12.12.2024, was filed by the undersigned assessee on 27.01.2023, against the order dated 20.12.2022 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi.

2. It is most respectfully submitted that in relation to aforesaid appeal, the appellant assessee had filed a declaration in Form 1 under Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2024. In response to the declaration filed by the appellant, the Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Lucknow has issued a certificate in Form no.

2. A copy of Form 2 is enclosed.

3. As the appellant has opted for the settlement under Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2024, she is withdrawing the aforesaid appeal. Prayer 4. In view of the aforesaid, it is most humbly prayed that the captioned appeal may kindly be treated as withdrawn by me.”

4. In view of the facts discussed above, we permit the assessee to withdraw this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced in the open Court on 13/12/2024.

Sd/- Sd/- [ANADEE NATH MISSHRA] [KUL BHARAT] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT DATED: 13/12/2024 Vijay Pal Singh, (Sr. PS) Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR 5. Guard file By order //True Copy// Assistant Registrar

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Smt Kamlesh Gupta Asstt. Commissioner of v. 35, Latouch Road, Lucknow- Income Tax Range-V, Pratyaksh Kar Bhawan, 226018. Lucknow-226001. PAN:AGQPG6712M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.A. Respondent by: Shri. Saurabh Dubey, CIT(DR) Date of hearing: 12 12 2024 Date of pronouncement: 13 12 2024 O R D E R

PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.:

5. BECAUSE the ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order on presumption, conjecture and surmises, without appreciating the evidences placed before him during the course of appellate proceedings.

6. BECAUSE the order appealed against is contrary to the facts, law and Principles of natural justice.”

2. A copy of Form 2 is enclosed.

4. In view of the facts discussed above, we permit the assessee to withdraw this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced in the open Court on 13/12/2024.

PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.:

5. BECAUSE the ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order on presumption, conjecture and surmises, without appreciating the evidences placed before him during the course of appellate proceedings.

6. BECAUSE the order appealed against is contrary to the facts, law and Principles of natural justice.”

2. A copy of Form 2 is enclosed.

4. In view of the facts discussed above, we permit the assessee to withdraw this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced in the open Court on 13/12/2024.

PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.:

5. BECAUSE the ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order on presumption, conjecture and surmises, without appreciating the evidences placed before him during the course of appellate proceedings.

6. BECAUSE the order appealed against is contrary to the facts, law and Principles of natural justice.”

2. A copy of Form 2 is enclosed.

4. In view of the facts discussed above, we permit the assessee to withdraw this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced in the open Court on 13/12/2024.

PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.:

5. BECAUSE the ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order on presumption, conjecture and surmises, without appreciating the evidences placed before him during the course of appellate proceedings.

6. BECAUSE the order appealed against is contrary to the facts, law and Principles of natural justice.”

2. A copy of Form 2 is enclosed.

4. In view of the facts discussed above, we permit the assessee to withdraw this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced in the open Court on 13/12/2024.

PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.:

5. BECAUSE the ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order on presumption, conjecture and surmises, without appreciating the evidences placed before him during the course of appellate proceedings.

6. BECAUSE the order appealed against is contrary to the facts, law and Principles of natural justice.”

2. A copy of Form 2 is enclosed.

4. In view of the facts discussed above, we permit the assessee to withdraw this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced in the open Court on 13/12/2024.

PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.:

5. BECAUSE the ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order on presumption, conjecture and surmises, without appreciating the evidences placed before him during the course of appellate proceedings.

6. BECAUSE the order appealed against is contrary to the facts, law and Principles of natural justice.”

2. A copy of Form 2 is enclosed.

4. In view of the facts discussed above, we permit the assessee to withdraw this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced in the open Court on 13/12/2024.

PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.:

5. BECAUSE the ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order on presumption, conjecture and surmises, without appreciating the evidences placed before him during the course of appellate proceedings.

6. BECAUSE the order appealed against is contrary to the facts, law and Principles of natural justice.”

2. A copy of Form 2 is enclosed.

4. In view of the facts discussed above, we permit the assessee to withdraw this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced in the open Court on 13/12/2024.

PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.:

5. BECAUSE the ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order on presumption, conjecture and surmises, without appreciating the evidences placed before him during the course of appellate proceedings.

6. BECAUSE the order appealed against is contrary to the facts, law and Principles of natural justice.”

2. A copy of Form 2 is enclosed.

4. In view of the facts discussed above, we permit the assessee to withdraw this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced in the open Court on 13/12/2024.

PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.:

5. BECAUSE the ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order on presumption, conjecture and surmises, without appreciating the evidences placed before him during the course of appellate proceedings.

6. BECAUSE the order appealed against is contrary to the facts, law and Principles of natural justice.”

2. A copy of Form 2 is enclosed.

4. In view of the facts discussed above, we permit the assessee to withdraw this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced in the open Court on 13/12/2024.

PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.:

5. BECAUSE the ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order on presumption, conjecture and surmises, without appreciating the evidences placed before him during the course of appellate proceedings.

6. BECAUSE the order appealed against is contrary to the facts, law and Principles of natural justice.”

2. A copy of Form 2 is enclosed.

4. In view of the facts discussed above, we permit the assessee to withdraw this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced in the open Court on 13/12/2024.

PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.:

5. BECAUSE the ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order on presumption, conjecture and surmises, without appreciating the evidences placed before him during the course of appellate proceedings.

6. BECAUSE the order appealed against is contrary to the facts, law and Principles of natural justice.”

2. A copy of Form 2 is enclosed.

4. In view of the facts discussed above, we permit the assessee to withdraw this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced in the open Court on 13/12/2024.

PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.:

5. BECAUSE the ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order on presumption, conjecture and surmises, without appreciating the evidences placed before him during the course of appellate proceedings.

6. BECAUSE the order appealed against is contrary to the facts, law and Principles of natural justice.”

2. A copy of Form 2 is enclosed.

4. In view of the facts discussed above, we permit the assessee to withdraw this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced in the open Court on 13/12/2024.

PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.:

5. BECAUSE the ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order on presumption, conjecture and surmises, without appreciating the evidences placed before him during the course of appellate proceedings.

6. BECAUSE the order appealed against is contrary to the facts, law and Principles of natural justice.”

2. A copy of Form 2 is enclosed.

4. In view of the facts discussed above, we permit the assessee to withdraw this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced in the open Court on 13/12/2024.

PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.:

5. BECAUSE the ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order on presumption, conjecture and surmises, without appreciating the evidences placed before him during the course of appellate proceedings.

6. BECAUSE the order appealed against is contrary to the facts, law and Principles of natural justice.”

2. A copy of Form 2 is enclosed.

4. In view of the facts discussed above, we permit the assessee to withdraw this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced in the open Court on 13/12/2024.

PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.:

BECAUSE while accepting only part of the construction cost for various years, the ld. CIT(A) has overlooked the material and information as well as the affidavit of the appellant placed before him in support of the construction cost claimed for Previous year 2001-02, 2006-07 and 2007- 08.

5. BECAUSE the ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order on presumption, conjecture and surmises, without appreciating the evidences placed before him during the course of appellate proceedings.

BECAUSE the order appealed against is contrary to the facts, law and Principles of natural justice.”

It is most respectfully submitted that in relation to aforesaid appeal, the appellant assessee had filed a declaration in Form 1 under Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2024. In response to the declaration filed by the appellant, the Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Lucknow has issued a certificate in Form no.

2. A copy of Form 2 is enclosed.

In view of the facts discussed above, we permit the assessee to withdraw this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced in the open Court on 13/12/2024.

SMT. KAMLESH GUPTA,LUCKNOW vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW.