Delhi High Court - Orders
Ambit Shelters Llp vs Income Tax Officer ,Ward -60 (5), New ... on 3 February, 2023
Author: Rajiv Shakdher
Bench: Rajiv Shakdher
$~19
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 1392/2023
AMBIT SHELTERS LLP ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr Rohit Jain with Mr Aniket D.
Agrawal and Mr Saksham Singhal,
Advocates.
versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER ,WARD -60 (5), NEW DELHI AND ORS.
..... Respondents
Through: Mr Abhishek Maratha, Sr. Standing
Counsel.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
HON'BLE MS JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU
ORDER
% 03.02.2023 [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] CM APPL. 5219/2023
1. Allowed, subject to the petitioner filing legible copies of the annexures, at least three days before the next date of hearing.
CM APPL. 5220/20232. Allowed, subject to the petitioner filing translated copies of the annexures, at least three days before the next date of hearing. W.P.(C) 1392/2023 and CM APPL. 5218/2023 [Application filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking interim relief]
3. This writ petition concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16 [Financial Year (FY) 2014-15].
W.P.(C) 1392/2023 page 1 of 4 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:TARUN RANA Signing Date:10.02.2023 17:46:15
4. The principal allegation against the petitioner is that during a search action conducted qua Dalal Group on 14.09.2017, certain incriminating documents concerning the petitioner emerged.
5. It is alleged that the petitioner has purchased the subject land from the aforesaid group for a consideration amounting to Rs.20,12,82,812/-. It is, thus, alleged that income amounting to the aforementioned amount has escaped assessment.
6. The petitioner has taken the stand that in the land records for a period spanning FY 2013-14 to FY 2018-19, there is nothing which would link the subject land to the petitioner. In fact, Mr Rohit Jain, who appears on behalf of the petitioner, says that up until today, the petitioner is not shown as the owner of the subject land, which is located at Nangla Jogiyan, Faridabad and admeasures 134 Kanal, 15 Marla.
7. Mr Jain says that, apart from the fact that the petitioner is not the owner of the subject land, the proceedings initiated by the respondents/revenue are also time-barred.
7.1 Mr Jain draws our attention to the fact that this very issue is being considered by the court in WP(C) 14326/2022, titled Himanshu Infratech Pvt. Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer & Ors. The order passed on 02.12.2022 in the said case is appended on page 248 of the case file, as Annexure 'I',
8. Mr Abhishek Maratha, learned senior standing counsel, who appears on behalf of the respondents/revenue, affirms the position that the issue with regard to the limitation obtains in this matter as well.
W.P.(C) 1392/2023 page 2 of 4 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:TARUN RANA Signing Date:10.02.2023 17:46:15
9. Since, out of the Rs.20,12,82,812/-, Rs.2,01,28,281/-, according to the respondents/revenue, is said to have escaped assessment in AY 2014-15, the balance amount i.e., Rs.18,11,54,531/- is treated as income under capital gains head in the AY in issue i.e., AY 2015-16.
10. Mr Jain says that the allegation is self-contradictory, because on the one hand, the respondents/revenue alleged that the subject land was purchased, and on the other hand, it is indicated that it was to be treated as capital gain.
11. The record shows that the trigger for initiating reassessment proceedings qua the petitioner is an unsigned agreement executed by certain parties with M/S Ambit Shelters LLP Pvt. Ltd.
12. Mr Jain says that, firstly, the agreement does not describe the petitioner. The petitioner goes by the name Ambit Shelters LLP. 12.1 Secondly, this is an unsigned document and given the fact that the petitioner has taken a categorical stand that it has not purchased the subject land, reassessment ought not to have been initiated against it.
13. Accordingly, issue notice.
13.1. Mr Maratha accepts notice on behalf of the respondents/revenue.
14. Counter-affidavit will be filed within six weeks. 14.1. Rejoinder thereto, if any, will be filed before the next date of hearing.
16. List the matter on 21.07.2023.
17. In the meanwhile, although the Assessing Officer (AO) will have liberty to continue with the reassessment proceedings, in case any order is passed which is adverse to the interest of the petitioner, the same shall not be given effect to, till further directions of the court.
W.P.(C) 1392/2023 page 3 of 4 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:TARUN RANA Signing Date:10.02.2023 17:46:15
18. At this stage, Mr Jain also says that the petitioner has placed before the AO, a letter received from the concerned Tehsildar that the subject land does not belong to the petitioner. The AO will, thus, share the material that he has in his possession which forms the basis for triggering the reassessment proceedings.
19. Parties will act, based on the digitally signed copies of the order.
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J
TARA VITASTA GANJU, J
FEBRUARY 3, 2023 / tr
Click here to check corrigendum, if any
W.P.(C) 1392/2023 page 4 of 4
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:TARUN
RANA
Signing Date:10.02.2023
17:46:15