Balbir Singh Vs ACIT (ITAT Raipur)
ITAT Raipur held that assessment framed by AO u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act without issuance of notice under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act is invalid and cannot be sustained in the eyes of law.
Facts- AO observed that though the assessee had received an amount of Rs.94,95,250/- from Naya Raipur Development Authority (NRDA) on 31.03.2012 as sale consideration of 3.998 acres of agricultural land that was sold vide registered sale deed dated 31.03.2012, but had not offered the “capital gain” arising on the said sale transaction for tax. AO observed that the assessee had wrongly claimed the entire amount of sale consideration as exempt on the ground that the subject agricultural land was situated beyond the municipal limits, and thus, was not a capital asset u/s. 2(14) of the Act. Thus, AO vide his order passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act, dated 27.12.2017 computed the Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) on the sale transaction at Rs.91,57,837/-.
CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed.
Conclusion- Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT Vs. Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Traders (P) Ltd. (2016) 3783 ITR 488 (Del) has held that absence of notice u/s.143(2) of the Act impregnates the proceeding with a jurisdictional defect, and hence, renders it as invalid in the eyes of law.
