{"id":34128,"date":"2023-04-22T18:11:27","date_gmt":"2023-04-22T12:41:27","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/naveen-kumar-jaiswal-v-ito-2022-215-dtr-277-327-ctr-226-jharkhand-hc\/"},"modified":"2024-02-04T21:26:20","modified_gmt":"2024-02-04T15:56:20","slug":"naveen-kumar-jaiswal-v-ito-2022-215-dtr-277-327-ctr-226-jharkhand-hc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/naveen-kumar-jaiswal-v-ito-2022-215-dtr-277-327-ctr-226-jharkhand-hc\/","title":{"rendered":"Naveen Kumar Jaiswal v. ITO (2022) 215 DTR 277\/ 327 CTR 226\/(2023)455 ITR 539  (Jharkhand HC)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The AO initiated re-assessment proceedings on the ground that the assessee has purchased immovable property. However, in fact the assessee alongwith his co-owners had sold their ancestral land. On a writ petition filed with the High Court, it was held that:<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>The Department has proceeded to initiate re-opening proceedings on wrong assumption of facts. In fact the Revenue has admitted in the Affidavit filed by it that due to typographical error\/ oversight the sale of land has been typed as purchase of land. It was held that this is not permissible in law and the reasons for re-opening as to be read as they were recorded by the AO and no substitution or deletion is permissible. The reasons recorded for re-opening should be clear and unambiguous and cannot be supplemented by filing an affidavit or oral submissions. Thus, the notice and the order passed thereof was quashed and set-aside with a liberty to the Revenue to initiate fresh proceedings in accordance with law. \u00a0(AY. 2017 -18 )<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 147 : Reassessment \u2013 With in four years- Wrong facts &#8211;  Re-opening based on wrong facts is impermissible- Typographical error\/ oversight in the reasons recorded for re-opening is not sustainable to uphold the re-assessment proceedings.  [ S. 148 , 151,   Art , 226 ] <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-34128","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-8Ss","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/34128","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=34128"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/34128\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":38990,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/34128\/revisions\/38990"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=34128"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=34128"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=34128"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}