Shri Arun Kaushal, Patiala V. ITO, W-5, Patiala

ITA 1238/CHANDI/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1253 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-12-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 28-10-2020
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 11-09-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARVIND SUDERSHAN
• Keywords: Reason to believe; Set aside
• Section: 147; 148

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, B,CHANDIGARH . . , , BEFORE SHRI N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO. 1238/CHD/2019 ! / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 SHRI ARUN KAUSHAL, # 9-B, GALI NO.5, HIRA BAGH COLONY, OPP. PBI. UNIVERSITY, PATIALA '# THE ITO , WARD-5, PATIALA $ % ./PAN NO: ALFPK2743Q $&/ APPELLANT ()$& /RESPONDENT HEARING THOUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING *+ , - /ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PARIKSHIT AGGARWAL, CA , - / REVENUE BY : SHRI ARVIND SUDERSHAN, JCIT . / , +0% /DATE OF HEARING : 28.10.2020 12! , +0% / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15.12.2020 / ORDER PER SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESS EE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 01.07.2019 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCO ME TAX (APPEALS), PATIALA [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS CIT(A)] 2. THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEAL HAS TAKEN FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1. THAT ON THE FACTS, CIRCUMSTANCES AND LEGAL POSITION OF THE CASE, THE WORTHY CIT(A) IN APPEAL N O. 10257/IT/CIT(A)/PTA/18-19 HAS ERRED IN PASSING THAT ITA NO. 1238-CHD/2010- SHRI ARUN KAUSHAL, PATIALA 2 ORDER IN CONTRAVENTION OF THE PROVISIONS OF S. 250( 6) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2. THAT ON LAW, FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS DESERVES TO BE QUASHED SINCE THE SAME LACKS JURISDICTIONAL REQUIREMENT U/S 148 R.W.S. 147 OF THE ACT. 3. THAT ON LAW, FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE WORTHY CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTIO N OF LD. AO IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 2,37,127/- ON ACCOUNT OF SALE OF A PLOT MEASURING 280 SQ. YARDS I N VILLAGE CHOURA EVEN WHEN THE SAID PLOT WAS NEVER ACTUALLY SOLD BY THE APPELLANT. 4. THAT ON LAW, FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE WORTHY CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTIO N OF LD. AO IN MAKING ADDITION ON THE BASIS OF SALE O F PLOT EVEN WHEN THE SALE DEED WAS EXECUTED VIA A FRAUDULENT GPA WITHOUT THE KNOWLEDGE OF APPELLANT. 5. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE FOR ANY ADDITION , DELETION OR AMENDMENT IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ON O R BEFORE THE DISPOSAL OF THE SAME. 3. GROUND NOS. 1 : GROUND NO.1 IS GENERAL IN NATURE AND DOES NOT NEED ANY SPECIFIC ADJUDICATION. 4. GROUND NO.2 : AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HA S BROUGHT OUR ATTENTION TO THE REASONS RECORDED BY TH E ASSESSING OFFICER FOR REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT WHICH READS AS UNDE R:- NAME OF THE ASSESSEE : SH. ARUN KAUSHAL, S/O SH. S OM NATH KAUSHAL, # 9-B, GAII NO.5, HIRA BAGH COLONY, OPP PBI. UNIVERSITY, PATIALA. ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-13 PAN : ALFPK2743Q7430 STATUS : INDL. ITA NO. 1238-CHD/2010- SHRI ARUN KAUSHAL, PATIALA 3 BRIEF REASONS FOR REOPENING THE CASE U/S 148 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 AS PER THE INFORMATION ON RECORD, THE ASSESSEE NAME LY SH. ARUN KAUSHAL, S/O SH. SOM NATH KAUSHAL, R/O HIRA BAGH COLONY, PATIALA HAS MADE HUGE TRANSACTIONS OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY DURING THE F.Y. 2011-12 RELEVANT TO A.Y. 2012-13 . FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE RECORD, IT IS FOU ND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NO CAPACITY TO MAKE SUCH A HUGE INVESTMENT IN THE SALE / PURCHASE OF THE PROPERTY. THEREFORE, 1 AM SATISFIED THAT THERE IS AN ESCAPEME NT OF RS. 33,83,000/- IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. 1, HAVE, THEREFORE, REASONS TO BELIEVE THAT AN INCOME OF RS. 33,83,000 /- HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT WITHIN THE MEANING OF PROVISION OF EXPLANATION 2 (B) OF SECTION 147 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. SD/- (ALIPT VERMA) INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5, PATIALA 5. A PERUSAL OF THE ABOVE RECORDED REASONS REVEAL THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD AN INFORMATION ON RECORD THAT THE ASSES SEE HAS MADE HUGE TRANSACTIONS OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY DURING FINANCIAL YEAR 2011-12 AND FURTHER FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE RECORD THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NO CAPACITY TO MAKE SUCH HUGE INVE STMENT . ON THE BASIS OF THE ABOVE INFORMATION ON RECORD, THE ASSES SING OFFICER WAS SATISFIED THAT THERE WAS AN ESCAPEMENT OF ASSESSME NT OF INCOME OF RS. 33,83,000/- AT THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, A PERUSAL OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER REVEALS THAT THERE IS NO MENTION O F ANY SUCH RECORD IN THE POSSESSION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOR THERE I S ANY ALLEGATION OF ANY INVESTMENTS MADE. THERE IS NO MENTION OF EVEN AFORESAID AMOUNT OF RS. 33,83,000/- REGARDING WHICH THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER ALLEGED IN THE REASONS RECORDED OF ESCAPEMENT OF INCOME. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE REASONS RECORDED BY TH E ASSESSING OFFICER WERE WRONG AND FALSE AND EVEN THERE IS NOT AN IOTA IN THE ITA NO. 1238-CHD/2010- SHRI ARUN KAUSHAL, PATIALA 4 ASSESSMENT ORDER OF ANY FACT MENTIONED IN THE REASO NS RECORDED. EVEN IN THE REASONS RECORDED, THERE IS NO MENTION AS TO FRO M WHAT RECORD AND ABOUT WHAT INVESTMENT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD IN FORMATION AND HOW THAT INFORMATION WAS RELATED TO THE ASSESSEE AND HO W THE ASSESSING OFFICER CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE INCOME OF T HE ASSESSEE HAD ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES IT CAN NOT BE SAID THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD ANY INFORMATION FROM WHICH HE HAD REASON TO BELIEVE THAT THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE HAD ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. IN THIS CASE, THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT IS, THUS, BAD IN LAW. IN VIEW OF THIS, THE RE-ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER IS NOT SUSTAINABLE IN THE EYES OF LAW AND THE SAME IS HERE BY QUASHED. 6. SINCE WE HAVE ALREADY QUASHED THE ASSESSMENT ORD ER, THEREFORE, THERE SEEMS NO NECESSITY TO DELIBERATE UPON THE MER ITS OF THE CASE REGARDING ADDITION OF RS. 2,37,127/- IN RESPECT OF SOME OTHER TRANSACTIONS AS THE SAME IS RENDERED ACADEMIC IN NA TURE. IN VIEW OF OUR FINDINGS GIVEN ABOVE, THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF CIT(A) IS SET ASIDE AND THE IMPUGNED ADDITIONS STAND DELETED. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 15.12.2020. SD/- SD/- ( . . / N.K. SAINI) ( ! ' / SANJAY GARG) #$% / VICE PRESIDENT &' / JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 15.12.2020 .. ITA NO. 1238-CHD/2010- SHRI ARUN KAUSHAL, PATIALA 5 3,(+45 65!+ / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. $& / THE APPELLANT 2. ()$& / THE RESPONDENT 3. . 7+ / CIT 4. . 7+ ( )/ THE CIT(A) 5. 58(+9 , 09 , :;<= / DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. <>/ / GUARD FILE 3 . / BY ORDER, ? / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR