LATE H.H. BHAWANI SINGH (THROUGH SMT. PADMINI DEVI, G/O. LEGAL HEIR PADMANABH SINGH),NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 22(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 3651/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 July 2021AY 2002-033 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the substantive assessment could only be finalized after the Supreme Court proceedings concluded and the real owner of the assets was determined. The matter was disposed of with liberty to both parties to approach the Tribunal later.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerned additions made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the CIT(A) regarding income from an estate, interest on FDR, and dividend adjustment. The estate's ownership was under dispute before the Supreme Court, with a receiver appointed.

What were the issues?

Whether substantive assessment can be finalized pending determination of ownership of assets by the Supreme Court and appointment of a receiver.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Not explicitly mentioned

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC-2’, NEW DELHI

Before: Ms. Suchitra KambleDr. B. R. R. Kumar

Hearing: 17.06.2021Pronounced: 07.07.2021

Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member:

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-16, New Delhi dated 15.02.2019.

Following grounds have been raised by the assessee:

“1. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the action of learned Assessing Officer in adding back income arising from the estate of late Maharaj Man Singh, including agricultural income aggregating to Rs.3,30,000/- purely on adhoc basis, ignoring the fact that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has appointed a receiver cum administrator to look after the estate of late Maharaja Maan Singh.

2 Late Sh. H.H. Bhawani Singh 2. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the action of learned Assessing Officer in adding back of interest on FDR of Rs. 50,000/- on adhoc basis, without providing any justifiable reasons for the same.

3. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the action of learned Assessing Officer by not allowing the adjustment of dividend, attached by the Income Tax Department aggregating to Rs.1,35,030/- towards advance tax as no details of adjustment towards ‘old outstanding dues’ has been provided.”

The assessments in the case of the assessee are continuously being assessee on substantive basis while the same is assessee on protective basis in the hands of Smt. Padmini Devi. The ld. CIT (A) confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer. During the hearing, it was brought to our notice that the matter of proportionate allotment of estates and the asset of the assessee (Late Man Singh) is before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the court receiver-cum-administrator has been appointed and proceedings have been stayed in case of the assessee for the earlier years. It was pleaded that pending the finalization, the matter may be kept in abeyance till final disposal as decided in the other related cases.

We find that the issue of substantial assessment can only be finalized after conclusion of the proceedings by the Court determining the real owner of the assets. Till such time, the matter stands disposed off with liberty to the revenue and the assessee to approach the Tribunal at the conclusion of the proceedings.

3 Late Sh. H.H. Bhawani Singh 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessed allowed for statistical purposes. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 07/07/2021.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →