Smt. Monika Rani Vs ITO (ITAT Chandigarh)
The appeal was filed against the order of the CIT(A), Karnal. The assessee challenged the validity of reassessment proceedings initiated under Sections 147 and 148 of the Income Tax Act and also contested additions aggregating ₹46,00,000 made on account of gifts received from her son, husband, husband’s HUF, and father-in-law.
The assessee had originally e-filed her return of income on 30.03.2011 declaring income of ₹2,06,465. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment by issuing a notice under Section 148 on 27.03.2017. The reasons recorded for reopening stated that the assessee had purchased property worth ₹1,49,02,500 during the financial year 2009-10 and had not filed her return of income. Based on these reasons, the Assessing Officer formed a belief that income had escaped assessment.
The assessee objected to the reopening proceedings. She pointed out that she had already filed her return of income electronically on 30.03.2011 and that the statement in the recorded reasons that no return had been filed was factually incorrect. She also submitted that she had not purchased property worth ₹1,49,02,500. According to her, she had acquired only a fractional share in agricultural land, and her share of the purchase consideration amounted to ₹49,32,000, with the total investment including stamp duty disclosed in her balance sheet at ₹52,20,000. This investment had already been disclosed in the return of income and accompanying financial statements filed with the department.
