ITO Vs Vasudev Tripathi (ITAT Ahmedabad)
Reopening Within 4 Years is Valid, but 50C Addition Deleted as DVO Value Accepted – Revenue’s Appeal Partly Allowed
Assessee, an individual, did not file return u/s 139. AO reopened assessment u/s 147 based on information of land sale on 26.09.2013. Notice u/s 148 dated 13.03.2019 was issued via email & speed post & duly served. Assessee filed ROI in response declaring ₹5,13,930. AO invoked section 50C as stamp duty value (jantri) of two sale deeds (₹4.51 Cr & ₹5.28 Cr) far exceeded stated sale price (₹1.79 Cr & ₹2.13 Cr). AO rejected Assessee’s claim that price was fixed via earlier banakhat (agreement to sell) of 2006/2009, because those agreements were notarized, not registered, & actual registered banakhat was only on 04.09.2012 after land was converted to non-agricultural. AO therefore adopted stamp value & computed LTCG addition of ₹5,68,77,945.
CIT(A) allowed relief to Assessee on two issues:
1. Held notice u/s 148 was beyond 4 years;
2. Deleted addition u/s 50C on merits.
Before ITAT:
Validity of Reopening
ITAT held CIT(A) erred. AY 2014-15 ends on 31.03.2015, & notice u/s 148 was issued on 13.03.2019, within 4 years. Also, Assessee did not file return u/s 139. Hence, reopening was valid. Revenue’s Ground 1 allowed.
