IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “B”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mr Pawan Kumar Singh v. Income Tax Officer

848, Tilak Colony, Subhash Ward-2(1)

Nagar, Bareilly (UP). Bareilly.

PAN:CCRPS4435G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Appellant by: Shri Abhinav Mehrotra, Adv.

Respondent by: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl.

CIT(DR)

Date of hearing: 22 04 2025 Date of pronouncement: 30 04 2025

O R D E R

PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.:

By way of this appeal, the assessee has challenged the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), dated 17.07.2014, pertaining to the assessment year 2009-10.

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: -

“1. That the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming addition of Rs.19,65,685/- under the head Long Term Capital Gains by applying provisions of section 50C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, with total disregard to the facts & circumstances of the case.

2. That the Learned Assessing Officer has erred in assumption of jurisdiction to initiate re-assessment proceedings u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in the case of the assessee.

3. The assessee reserves its right to add, amend, alter or delete any grounds of appeal at the time of hearing.”

2. The assessee has also taken additional ground which reads as under: -

“1. Because, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the impugned orders of assessment as also of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) are patiently illegal and bad in law since notice u/s 143(2) has been issued on the very same day, assessee filed his return of income. The Hon'ble Court has held that issuance of notice u/s 143(2), on the same day of filing return signifies that notice u/s 143(2) was issued without any application of mind and without examining the return of income and such notice is illegal and non-est in law. The entire proceedings are therefore liable to be set aside and quashed as it is a case synonymous to an assessment without the issuance of jurisdiction notice u/s 143(2).”

3. Heard, the Ld. Representatives of the parties on the additional ground. This ground is on the point of law i.e on the validity of the assessment order in the absence of valid notice u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”, for short). The ground being legal is admitted herein and shall be disposed of along with other grounds of appeal for the sake of convenience.

4. The facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the assessment was re-opened u/s 147 of the Act on the basis that the assessee had sold property for a sale consideration of Rs.7,00,000/-. However, the value of the property as per circle rate was Rs.44,00,000/-. The Assessing Officer issued a notice to the assessee u/s 148 of the Act. In response to the statutory notice u/s 148 of the Act, there was no compliance by the assessee. Thereafter, notices u/s 142(1) of the Act was issued to the assessee. In response thereto, Shri Navneet Gaur, Advocate attended the assessment proceedings on behalf of the assessee and filed copy of sale deed. The AO has recorded that the issue qua valuation of properly was referred to the Assistant Valuation Officer for valuing the market value as per Section 50C of the Act. However, the Valuation Officer expressed his inability vide letter dated 28.12.2011 to assess value on account of the assessee’s failure to provide the relevant information. Thus, the AO adopted the value as per circle rate and made the impugned addition, by computing capital gain of Rs.19,65,330/- at the hand of the assessee being owner of half share into the property. Aggrieved by this, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who sustained the finding of the assessing authority. Now, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.

5. The assessee has taken multiple grounds against the impugned addition. It is submitted on behalf of the assessee that the assessing