O R D E R

PER KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

These appeals at the instance of the assessee are directed against the order of ld. CIT(A)/NFAC both dated 24.10.2024 vide DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1069923276(1) for the AY 2015-16 and vide DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1069922922 (1) for the AY 2016-17 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”).These two appeals are clubbed together, heard together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience & brevity.

2. First, we take ITA No.2515/Bang/2024 for the AY 2015-16 in which the assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: -

1. The order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, (“CIT(A)”), under section 250 of the Act insofar as it is against the Appellant, is opposed to law, weight of evidence, natural justice and probabilities on the facts and circumstances of the Appellant’s case.

2. The impugned reassessment proceedings are bad in law, non est and passed in violation of principles of natural justice on the facts and circumstances of the case.

3. The impugned reassessment proceedings are without jurisdiction and consequently, the assessment order is bad in law on the facts and circumstances of the case.

4. The authorities below failed to failed to appreciate that there is no information that suggests escapement of income on the facts and circumstances of the case

5. The mandatory procedures applicable for reassessment proceedings are not followed and consequently, the impugned proceedings are void ab initio on the facts and circumstances of the case.

6. The notice issued under section 148A(b) of the Act is non est and bad in law on the facts and circumstances of the case.

7. The order passed under section 148A(d) of the Act is non est and bad in law on the facts and circumstances of the case.

8. The notice issued under section 148 of the Act is non est and bad in law on the facts and circumstances of the case.

9. The sanction granted under section 151 of the Act is mechanical and without application of mind and consequently, the impugned proceedings are vitiated on the facts and circumstances of the case.

10. The sanction granted under section 151 of the Act is non est and bad in law and consequently, the impugned proceedings are vitiated on the facts and circumstances of the case.

11. The reassessment proceedings are barred by limitation on the facts and circumstances of the case.

12. The learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the order of the learned Assessing Officer and assessing the total income of the Appellant at Rs. 4,34,10,535/- as against the returned income of Rs. 235/- on the facts and circumstances of the case.

13. The Authorities below erred in law and on facts in adding an amount of Rs. 1,55,30,300/- as short term capital gains on the facts and circumstances of the case.

14. The Authorities below erred in law and on facts in treating an amount of Rs. 2,78,80,000/- as short term capital gains on the facts and circumstances of the case.

15. The Authorities below erred in law and on facts in not granting the deduction towards cost of acquisition on the facts and circumstances of the case.

16. The Authorities below failed to appreciate the fact that it is settled proposition of law that the entire sale consideration received on sale of property by the Appellant cannot be added as the income of the Appellant on the facts and circumstances of the case.

3. Brief facts of the case are that as per the information received, the assessee had sold an immovable property for a consideration of Rs.2,78,80,000/-however, the assessee had not filed any return of income by disclosing capital gains from sale of immovable property. Accordingly, the case was reopened by issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act on 6.4.2022. In response, the assessee filed his return of income on 23.5.2022 declaring total income of Rs.235/-. The assessee had also claimed refund of Rs.1,55,303/- on account of TDS. The assessee ha