आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर (cid:586)ायपीठ, रायपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR (cid:373)ी रिवश सूद, (cid:586)ाियक सद(cid:735) एवं (cid:373)ी अ(cid:348)ण खोड़िपया, लेखा सद(cid:735) के सम(cid:407) ।

BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No: 469/RPR/2024 (िनधा१रण वष१ Assessment Year: 2015-16)

Singhal Marketing Private Limited, V Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Vandana Building, M. G. Road, s Central Circle-1, Raipur, C.G.

Raipur- 492 001, C.G.

PAN: AADCS2842Q (अपीलाथ५/Appellant) . (ঋ(cid:529)थ५ / Respondent)

.

िनधा१ौरती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri R. B. Doshi, CA राज(cid:738) की ओर से /Revenue by : Smt. Tarannum Verma, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 27.01.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 28.02.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, AM:

This captioned appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), NFAC, Delhi, [in short “Ld. CIT(A)”] u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), dated 30.08.2024, for the Assessment Year 2015-16, which in turn arises from the order of Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), (in short “Ld. AO”) u/s 143(3)

of the Act, dated 11.12.2017.

2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, are as under:

1. Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming disallowance of Rs.2,68,00,000/- made by AO on account of transfer expenses claimed by appellant under the head Capital Gains. The disallowance made by AO and confirmed by Ld. CIT(A)

is arbitrary, baseless and not justified.

2. The assessment order passed by AO is illegal, ab initio void inasmuch as no notice u/s 143(2) was issued by jurisdictional AO. Assessment order is illegal and liable to be quashed.

3. Assessment order passed by AO is illegal inasmuch as no order u/s 127 was passed for transfer of case from DCIT-2(1), Raipur to DCIT-1(1), Raipur. Consequently DCIT-1(1) did not acquire jurisdiction to frame assessment. Assessment proceedings is illegal and consequent assessment order is liable to be quashed.

4. The appellant reserves the right to amend, modify or add any of the ground/s of appeal.

3. Brief facts are that the assessee is a private limited company, had filed its Return of Income for AY 2015-16 on 30.09.2015 declaring income at “NIL”, consisting of Business Loss of Rs. (5,55,406/-) and Long-Term Capital Loss of Rs. (46,40,342/-). During the assessment proceedings, it was noticed by Ld. AO that the working of Capital Loss by the assessee is not justifiable, as the assessee had claimed transfer charges of Rs. 2,68,00,000/- and claimed expenses towards sale of the subject land. Assessee’s submission that the transfer charges consist of payments towards cancellation of agreements with (i) Vandana Rolling Mills for Rs. 78,00,000/- and (ii) Vandana Ispat Ltd. For Rs. 1,90,00,000/-. The claim of assessee before the Ld. AO was denied with the observations that (i) Vandana Rolling Mills and Vandana Ispat Ltd. are group entities of the assessee company, having common directors and shareholders, (ii) It was just to divert the profits from taxable entity to entities having unabsorbed losses, (iii) Unregistered agreements on simple paper, an afterthought, veracity of such arrangement is doubtful (iv) tool of tax evasion, (v) No handing over of possession or any binding encumbrance between the parties at the time of such agreement, just a colorable device, it is a vague claim with no substance, the same cannot be allowed. Ld. AO in conclusion disallowed the claim of assessee for Rs. 2,68,00,000/- and have determined the taxable income of assessee at Rs. 2,19,16,3,75/-.

4. Aggrieved with the aforesaid additions, assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT (A), assailing various grounds on merits as well as to challenge the legality in framing the impugned assessments u/s 143(3) of the Act qua the assumption of jurisdiction by the Ld. AO. After discussing the case of assessee, Ld. CIT(A) disposed of the appeal of the assessee with th