Bhushan Vasant Parelkar vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 41(2)(1), Mumbai

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Bhushan Vasant Parelkar, did not file his original return of income for the year under consideration. The Assessing Officer noted that the assessee had entered into a property sale transaction along with three co-owners. The total value of consideration as per the registered deed of the property was Rs.3 lakhs, whereas the valuation for payment of stamp duty was at Rs.1,66,76,000/-. Since the sale value consideration of the property was less than the value determined by the stamp duty valuation authority, the Assessing Officer noted that this has implications under section 50C, making the assessee liable to tax for the difference. The Assessing Officer arrived at reasons to believe that income of Rs.1,66,76,000/- has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Act. Accordingly, a notice under section 148 was issued on 31.05.2021.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Validity of the notice issued under section 148 on account of being barred by limitation.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Amit Girdharbhai Patel vs. ACIT

  Ahmedabad bench

• Mrs. Geeta Narendra Gandhi Vs. ITO Ward 19(1)(1), Mumbai

  SMC Bench, Mumbai benchAY 2019-20Partly Allowed

• Mukesh Vaikunthlal Mehta vs Income Tax Officer Ward 34(2)(1), Mumbai

  Mumbai Bench benchAY 2011-2012Partly Allowed

• Debasish Banerjee vs. ITO, Ward-44(1), Kolkata

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2018-19Allowed

• Dilip Mohandas Devani vs. Income Tax Officer

  Ahmedabad bench

• Material Research Instruments Vs. ACIT-Circle 16(2), Mumbai

  Mumbai Bench benchAY 2006-07Partly Allowed