Aslam Fazlurrehman Kagdi vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee filed a return of income for the Assessment Year 2015-16 on 30.09.2015, declaring a total income of Rs.29,78,150/-. The case was selected under 'limited scrutiny' and an Assessment Order under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was passed on 17.10.2017, determining the total income at Rs.29,78,150/-. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) observed that the assessee, along with two other co-owners, had purchased an immovable property for Rs.59,01,000/- from sellers, with a stamp duty of Rs.7,90,800/-. The fair market value of the property was Rs.1,61,38,775/-, exceeding the claimed sales consideration by Rs.1,02,37,775/-. The PCIT issued a notice under Section 263 of the Act, which the assessee did not respond to, leading to the PCIT passing an order under Section 263 and directing the Assessing Officer to pass a fresh Assessment Order. The assessee filed an appeal against this order.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the PCIT had the jurisdiction to pass the order under Section 263 of the Act.
• 2. Whether the order passed by the PCIT is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Partly Assessee / Partly Revenue.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Mayur Kanubhai Shah vs ITO, Ward 19(2)(2), Mumbai

  Mumbai Bench 'E', Mumbai benchAY 2016-17Remanded

• Raghvendra Singh

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2018-2019Allowed

• Aero Pack Products Private Limited Vs. Income Tax Officer

• Rashmi Seventilal Vakharia vs. Income Tax Officer

  Mumbai “D” Bench benchAY 2018-19Allowed

• VIVEK OMPRAKASH ABROL Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

  Mumbai bench

• Meera Sonthalia vs. ACIT, Circle-3(1), Asansol

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2014-15Allowed