आयकर अपील(cid:547)य अ(cid:876)धकरण Ûयायपीठ रायपुर म(cid:581)।

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.348/RPR/2023 (cid:467)नधा(cid:91)रण वष (cid:91) / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Rahul Bajpai Idgah Chowk, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh-495 001 PAN: AEXPB4410L .......अपीलाथ(cid:568) / Appellant बनाम / V/s.

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur (C.G.)

……(cid:292)×यथ(cid:568) / Respondent Assessee by : Shri R.B Doshi, CA Revenue by : Shri S.L Anuragi, CIT-DR सुनवाई क(cid:551) तार(cid:547)ख / Date of Hearing : 09.01.2025 घोषणा क(cid:551) तार(cid:547)ख / Date of Pronouncement : 20.01.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER RAVISH SOOD, JM:

The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC), Delhi, dated 27.09.2023, which in turn arises from the order passed by the A.O under Sec.143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) dated 30.12.2019 for the assessment year 2014-15. The assessee has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal before us:

"1. That the order u/s 250 as passed by the Ld.CIT (Appeals) is bad in law as well as on facts.

2. That the reopening is invalid based on change of opinion as the facts of purchase of land worth Rs.4,11,000/- was brought to the notice of A.O. in the original assessment. No new material was available to the A.O. – ITAT Raipur in Lakhichand Sidara ITA NO.

180/RPR/2017.

3. The order is Void-ab-initio as the copy of reasons were supplied at the fag end of the order u/s 143(3), thus violating the directions of the Hon'ble SC in GKN Driveshaft.

4. That the order is Void-ab-initio as the copy of approval as requested was not provided - ITAT, Raipur in the case of Saraswati Garewal, ITA No. 166/RPR/2022 dated 25/10/2023.

5. That the CIT(A) erred in invoking section 56(2)(vii)(b) not considering that the land purchased was stock in trade and shown in the balance sheet as current assets at the time of original assessment also.

6. That CIT(A) erred in confirming addition of Rs.3,70,89,000/- to the total income of the appellant.

7. That the appellant craves leave to add to and/or amend. Alter; rescind the grounds taken here in above, before or the time of hearing of this appeal.”

2. Also, the assessee has raised an additional ground of appeal which reads as under:

"In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, reassessment order passed by A.O is illegal, ab initio void as it was passed without issuing notice u/s.143(2) within the prescribed time. The reassessment order has been passed in violation of mandatory provisions of law and is liable to be quashed as illegal and not sustainable.

As the assessee based on the additional ground of appeal has assailed the validity of the jurisdiction that was assumed by the A.O for framing the impugned assessment, the adjudication of which would not require looking any further beyond the facts available on record, therefore, we have no hesitation in admitting the same. Our aforesaid view that where an assessee, had raised, though for the first time, an additional ground of appeal before the Tribunal which involves purely a question of law and requires no further verification of facts, then, the same merits admission finds support from the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of National Thermal Power Company Ltd. Ltd. Vs. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 383 (SC).

3. Succinctly stated, the assessee had filed his original return of income for the subject year i.e. A.Y.2014-15 on 31.03.2015, declaring an income of Rs.38,06,600/-. Original assessment was framed by the A.O vide his order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act, dated 23.08.2016 accepting the returned income.

4. Subsequently, the A.O based on information that while for the assessee had purchased a land situated at Talapara, Bilaspur vide a registered sale d