##PAGE1##

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

LUCKNOW ‘A’ BENCH, LUCKNOW

BEFORE SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT

AND

SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No.434/LKW/2024

A.Y. 2015-16

Vikas jain, vs. The ACIT,

PHA-2N/:1 A, KBiQdPwJa8i0 N4a9gRar , Kanpur- Circle 2(1)(1), Kanpur 208001

208006

(Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by: Sh. Rakesh Garg, Adv

Revenue by: Sh. Amit Kumar, DR

Date of hearing: 07.10.2025

Date of pro nouncement: O R D3 1E. 1R2 .2025

PER NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, A.M.:

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the orders of the ld. CIT(A),

NFAC on 17.05.2024 wherein the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the

assessee against the order passed by the ld. Assessing Officer under section 147

r.w.s. 143(3) for the A.Y. 2015-16 on 27.12.2018. The grounds of appeal are as

under:- 01. Because there being no reason to believe, far from there being any

material to form reasons to believe, the proceedings initiated right from issue

o“f notice u/s. 148 and the re-assessment framed thereof are all without

jurisdiction bad in law, the order passed be quashed.

02. Because the so-called reasons having been recorded applying Explanation

2(a) to Section 147, of the Act which not being applicable, the very reason to

believe being contrary to the mandate of the section, the proceedings-

initiated u/s 148, the reassessment framed are all contrary to the provisions

of law, be quashed.

03. Because the approval given by the competent authority u/s 151, being

mechanical in nature without verification of facts, the notice issued u/s 148

and the reassessment framed thereafter be quashed.

1

ITA No.434/LKW/2024

Vikas Jain

A.Y. 2015-16

04. Because the NFAC has erred on facts and in law in upholding the addition

of Rs.21,12,500/- u/s 50C of the Act which addition is contrary to facts, bad

in law, be deleted.

05. Because the NFAC has failed to appreciate the facts and circumstances of

the case and has arbitrarily held that the provisions of section 50C are

applicable thereby erred in adding the amount of Rs.21,12,000/- being the

difference between the sale consideration actually received and the stamp

value as estimated by the Stamp Valuation Authority, such addition being

contrary to facts, bad in law, the addition made be deleted.

06. 06. Because alternatively the NFAC, has erred on facts and in law in not

accepting the revised/modified computation of income in as much as the

remuneration of Rs.7,02,335/- received by the assessee from the partnership

firm, M/s. Gayatri Petroleum has been added twice, first by way of difference

on account of addition under section 50C and again as income from business

in the hands of the assessee appellant, the addition made be deleted.

07. Because the NFAC has erred on facts and in law in holding that the

alterative claim made by the assessee is not in line with decision of Goetze

(India Ltd.) failing to appreciate that the said decision is not applicable to the

appellate authorities, NFAC should have adjudicated upon the said ground

which having not been done, the order passed by the CIT(A) is bad in law be

quashed.

08. Because the notice of demand issued u/s 156 dated 27.12.2018 having not

been signed by the ACIT-4, Kanpur is as much as the same materially differ

with the signatories as on the body of the Assessment order, the order passed

and the demand created both are bad in law be quashed.”

2. The facts of the case are that the assessee filed a return for the A.Y. 2015-

16 declaring a total income of Rs. 45,39,070/-, which was processed under section

143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Subsequently, an information was received

from the Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(5), Kanpur that the assessee had sold a

property below the market value / stamp duty value. Therefore, the case was

reopened under section 147 after the necessary approvals, by way of issue of

notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act. The information on the basis of

which the case was reopened, was that the assessee who was a partner in M/s

Gayatri Petroleum, had sold a petrol pump buil