Sanjib Banerjee, J. - (1.) These two petitions pertain to notices issued under Sec. 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for reassessment under Sec. 147 thereof in respect of assessment year 2007 -08.
(2.) There is no dispute that the first proviso to Sec. 147 of the Act applies. In the case of the petitioning assessee in the first matter, the proposed reassessment would be a second reassessment. In respect of the petitioner in the second matter, the proposed reassessment would be in addition to the scrutiny assessment undertaken earlier. The facts pertaining to the first petition are referred to in this judgment since the facts are common in the sense that the matter pertains to the sale of an immovable property jointly owned by these petitioners with some others.
(3.) In the computation of total income for year ended March 31, 2007, the first petitioner filed the return claiming long term capital gain on the sale of a New Delhi property at 3, Tilak Marg. The sale consideration of such petitioner's one -fourth share in the property was indicated as Rs. 21,56,25,000/ -. After deducting the legal fees and brokerage involved in the sale, the net consideration was shown as Rs. 21,14,14,419/ -. The cost of acquisition of the property as at April 1, 1981 was claimed as per the valuer's report appended to the return at Rs. 11.91 crore and the petitioner's one -fourth share was said to be Rs. 2,97,75,000/ -. The indexed cost of the property at the time of the sale was shown to be Rs. 15,45,32,250/ - and the net gain to such petitioner was indicated as Rs. 5,68,82,169/ -. The petitioners also claimed the benefit under Sec. 54EC of the Act by investing in REC bonds of value of Rs. 50 lakh. Finally, both petitioners claimed to have invested in residential houses of value in excess of Rs. 6 crore, such that the net capital gain from the sale of the immovable property was covered by the investment made in the REC bonds under Sec. 54EC of the Act and in the investment in another residential house under Sec. 54 thereof.;