Shantha Alias Shanthamma Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore)
Bangalore Tribunal has quashed the assessment framed u/s 153C & deleted additions exceeding ₹150 crores made on account of capital gains, business income, & deposits. Tribunal held that in the absence of incriminating material, proceedings u/s 153C were invalid & further found multiple jurisdictional defects in the assessment order.
Assessee & her husband had entered into Joint Development Agreements with M/s SJR Prime Corporation Pvt Ltd (2012) & M/s Sunil Mantri Realty Ltd (2009). On the basis of these agreements & occupancy certificate, AO issued notice u/s 153C after a search at the residence of assessee’s husband in February 2020. AO computed long-term capital gains of ₹111.29 crore in respect of SJR Plaza City JDA & ₹37.56 crore in respect of Mantri Premero Project, taxed sale proceeds of 29 flats aggregating to ₹16 crore as business income & brought to tax refundable deposit of ₹1.5 crore as “income from other sources.” CIT(A) upheld the additions.
Before Tribunal, Assessee contended that no incriminating material was found during search, as the JDAs were already disclosed in a sworn statement of her husband prior to search. It was argued that satisfaction note was not properly recorded for each year, notice u/s 143(2) was never issued after filing return & the assessment order itself lacked valid DIN & was not traceable on ITBA portal. Reliance was placed on Abhisar Buildwell (SC, 2023), Sunil Kumar Sharma (Kar HC, 2024) & Laxman Das Khandelwal (SC, 2019).
