SABIHA SULTANA
90, Dharmaraj Koil Street,
Bangalore North,
Bangalore, Karnataka, India - 560001
Mobile No: 7204058438
Email:
[email protected]Date: 14-02-2025
To,
The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)
Subject: Submission of Documents for Appeal under Form No. 35 for Assessment Year 2018-
19
Dear Sir/Madam,
I, Sabiha Sultana, am submitting my appeal under Form No. 35 as per Section 246A of the
Income-tax Act, 1961, in connection with the order passed by the Assessing Officer for the
Assessment Year 2018-19. The relevant details of the appeal are provided below:
1. Acknowledgement Number: 632338900090724
2. Order Date: 28-Feb-2024
3. Income-tax Authority passing the order: KAR-W-(113)(92)
4. Section of the Income-tax Act under which the appeal is filed: Section 147
5. Grounds for Appeal:
➢ The order passed under Section 144 (Best Judgment Assessment) was
erroneous because the Assessee was not required to file a return for the assessment
year due to non-applicability of filing requirements.
➢ The Assessing Officer wrongly made an addition of ₹1,51,69,210, considering
the purchase of property and construction expenses as unexplained investment.
In support of this appeal, I am submitting the following documents for your consideration:
1. Sale Deed
2. Purchase Deed
3. STATMENTS OF FACTS
4. ITR Computation
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Yours sincerely,
SABIHA SULTANA
Before the Hon’ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)
In the case of Sabiha Sultana
V/s
Income Tax Officer Ward 1(2)(1), Bangalore
A.Y. 2018-19
TAN: - AVAPS2779M
STATMENTS OF FACTS
1. That the Assessee is not engaged in any employment or business thereof for
Earning Income Salary thereof.
2. That the assessee had not filed its return of Income tax U/s 139 of Income tax Act,
1961 F.Y. 2017-18 which was due to be filed as per the due date as specified under
139(1) and had not filed due to non applicability of Filing as the assesse was not
having any other income for that AY.
3. That the relevant Document for the Sale is hereby enclosed .
1. That the assesse had received the Notice stating As per information available in on
perusal of the data available on e-filing portal, it is found that the assessee did not
file return of income for AY 2018-19, despite having been entered into high value
transactions as mentioned above. Subsequently, the notice u/s 148 of the Act was
issued and was duly served upon the assessee.
2. That the Assessee had Purchased the Residential Plot and had made expenses for
Construction of the Residential the relevant document are enclosed.
3. That the AO has erred the order while making the best judgement U/s 144 of the
Income Tax Act,1961 by considering the Purchase of Property as Unexplained
Investment.
4. That In CST vs H.M Esufali H.M Abdulali (1970) ITR 271 (SC) it has been
observed by the Supreme Court that the assessing authority while making the "best
judgment" assessment, no doubt, should arrive at its conclusion without any bias
and on rational basis and that the said authority should not be vindictive or
capricious and that basis adopted in estimating the turnover should have a
reasonable nexus with the estimate made.
5. That In State of Kerala vs C.Velukutty (1966z0 60 ITR 239 (SC), it has been
observed that limits of powers are implicit in the expression "best of his judgment".
Judgment is a faculty to decide matters with wisdom truly and legally. Judgment
does not depend upon arbitrary caprice of a judge, but on settled and invariable
principles of justice and though there is an element of guesswork in a "best
judgment" assessment, it shall not be a wild one but shall have a reasonable nexus
to the available material and the circumstances of each case.
6. That The decision of Privy Council in CIT vs Laxminarayan Badridas (1937) 5
ITR 170 (PC) rendered on the provisions in the 1922 Act is a classic one in which
it was observed that the officer making best judgment assessment should not act
dishonestly, vindicatively or capriciously because he must exercise "judgment" in
the matter. He must make what he honestly believes to be a fair estimate of the
proper figure of assessment and for this purpose, he must take into account local
knowledge and repute in regard to the assessee's circumstances and all other
matters which he thinks will assist him in arriving at a fair and proper estimate and
though there must necessary be a guesswork in the matter it must be a honest
guesswork.
7. That the Assessing officer has not given reasonable time for hearing during our
appearance through Authorized Representative and considered the facts of the
case.
8. That During the search not a single piece of evidence was found which depicts
that any income which has been earned by the appellant has not been disclosed.
9. That the A.O has erred the order by not giving the reasonable hearing under the
principles of natural juctice.
10. That the AO has erred the order by not considering the real facts and circumstances
of the case and passing high pitched order against the assessee.
11. That the assessee requests to re-hear the assessment and will provide all the
necessary documents for the assessment in full compliance.
A.Y. 2018-2019
Name : SABIHA SULTANA P. Y. : 2017-2018
Father's Name : P.A.N. : AVAPS 2779 M
Address : Bangalore - 560 001 D.O.B. :
N
Status : Individual
Ward : KARNATAKA
Resident
Statement of Income
Sch.No Rs. Rs. Rs.
Capital Gains
LTCG-1 1 6,43,309
Income chargeable under the head "Capital gains" 6,43,309
Total Income 6,43,309
Total income rounded off u/s 288A 6,43,310
Income Tax
Long-term capital gain
Taxable @ 20% 6,43,309 78,662
Tax on total income 78,662
Add: Education cess 2,360
Tax with cess 81,022
Net Tax 81,022
TDS 2 2,80,000
Total prepaid taxes 2,80,000
Balance Tax -1,98,978
Fee u/s 234F 10,000
Refund Due 1,88,980
Schedule 1
Long term capital gain
Residential House Property
Date of acquisition 23-Dec-2009
Date of transfer 28-Mar-2018
Sale consideration 2,80,00,000
Stamp duty value u/s 50C 2,80,00,000
Less: Selling expenses
Stamp Duty expenses 15,68,040
Net sale consideration 2,64,31,960
Acquisition details Financial Year Cost Indexed cost
Residential Vacant Site-3032060*272/148 2009-10 30,32,060 55,72,435
Improvement details
... 2
2
SABIHA SULTANA Asst year: 2018-2019
Construction cost-11000000*272/148 2009-10 1,10,00,000 2,02,16,216
Taxable Capital gain 6,43,309
Schedule 2
Unclaimed TDS (Form 16B - 194IA) B/F
Deductor, PAN, Certificate No. & FY Unclaimed TDS TDS claimed Gross Receipts
deducted in current year as per 26AS
Amjath Sheriff M, PAN- CJYPA0401Q 2,80,000 2,80,000 28,00,000
Bank A/c for Refund:
Date : 15-Jan-2024
Place : Bangalore (SABIHA SULTANA)
