Case Law Details
Himanshu Manoranjan Bhatt Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
Introduction: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Mumbai addressed the case of Himanshu Manoranjan Bhatt vs ITO, where the assessee challenged the reassessment proceedings for the assessment year 2011–12. The dispute arose due to the non-disclosure of sale and purchase of immovable property in the original return. This article delves into the grounds of appeal, the reassessment proceedings, and the ITAT’s decision on the addition of Long-Term Capital Gains (LTCG).
Detailed Analysis: Himanshu Manoranjan Bhatt, an individual assessee, filed the original return of income physically on 03/11/2011, declaring a total income of Rs. 1,33,532. Reassessment proceedings were initiated based on information indicating undisclosed property transactions during the assessment year. The notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act was issued on 29/03/2018.
The assessee responded by requesting the original return to be treated as a response to the notice under section 148. Later, an e-filed return on 20/04/2018, revised on 20/11/2018, declared income of Rs. 1,33,532, including an exemption claim under section 54 for LTCG on the sale of a flat. The Assessing Officer (AO), however, added Rs. 72,83,143 as LTCG, as the original return did not disclose property transactions.
The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) upheld the reassessment proceedings but dismissed the appeal against the addition of LTCG. The ITAT, while validating the initiation of reassessment, directed a de novo adjudication on the section 54 exemption claim.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
