RAJENDRA DUNDAPPA SHATAGAR,BIJAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 & TPS, BIJAPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 671/BANG/2021Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 April 2022AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal based on the erroneous presumption that the assessee had not paid admitted tax, as no return of income was filed. The matter is restored to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee deposited demonetised currency notes of Rs. 6,30,000/- in their bank account. Since no return of income was filed, the AO completed the assessment to the best of his judgment, determining the income at Rs. 6,30,000/- and levying tax under Section 115BBE. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal presuming tax on returned income was not paid.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal on the presumption of non-payment of admitted tax when no return of income was filed by the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 115BBE,Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” “A’’BENCH: BANGALORE

Before: SHRI B. R. BASKARAN

For Appellant: Ms. Hitha, A.R. for Prathibha R
For Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing counsel for dept
Hearing: 07.04.2022Pronounced: 07.04.2022

PER B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 25.10.2021 passed by Ld CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi and it relates to the assessment year 2017-18. The assessee is aggrieved by the decision of Ld CIT(A) in dismissing the appeal of the assessee on erroneous presumption that the assessee has not paid the tax on returned income and thus in not adjudicating the addition of Rs.6,30,000/- made by the AO.

2.

The learned counsel for the assessee, Smt R Pratibha sought adjournment through her colleague Ms Hitha, Advocate. However, I

Rajendra Dundappa Shatagar, Bangalore

Page 2 of 3 found that the contention of the assessee is that the Ld CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on erroneous presumption. On a perusal of the AO, I noticed that the above said contention is prima facie appears to be correct. Hence I proceed to dispose of the appeal.

3.

I heard Ld D.R and perused the record. The assessee herein had deposited demonitised currency notes amounting to Rs.6,30,000/- in his bank account during the period relevant to AY 2017-18. Since the assessee has not filed return of income, the AO issued notice u/s 142(1) of the Act calling the assessee to file return of income. Since there was no response from the assessee, the AO completed the assessment to the best of his assessment by determining total income of the assessee at Rs.6,30,000/-. The AO also levied tax as per sec.115BBE of the Act.

4.

The Ld CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee without deciding the same on merits on the presumption that the assessee has not paid admitted tax shown in the return of income filed by the assessee.

5.

I noticed earlier that the assessee has not filed return of income at all and hence the AO was constrained to issue notice u/s 142(1) of the Act calling for return of income. In the absence of any return of income, the question of paying tax as per return of income does not arise at all. Accordingly, I am of the view that the Ld CIT(A) fell on error in entertaining the presumption that the assessee has not paid the admitted tax.

6.

In the grounds of appeal urged before the Tribunal, the assessee has explained the sources for making deposits of Rs.6,30,000/-. However, there was no occasion for Ld CIT(A) in considering

Rajendra Dundappa Shatagar, Bangalore

Page 3 of 3 explanations furnished by the assessee on merits, since he has dismissed the appeal in limine. Under these set of facts, I am of the view that the order passed by Ld CIT(A) cannot be sustained, since the question of paying tax on admitted income does not arise in this case. Accordingly, I set aside the order passed by Ld CIT(A) and restore all the issues to his file for adjudicating them on merits, after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

7.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 7th Apr, 2022

More judgments on Section 115BBE

All 8,662 judgments and leading authorities on Section 115BBE →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →