Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) which confirmed the AO's action of assessing income on a protective basis. The assessee contended that the impugned order was illegal as the substantive assessment for a subsequent year was still pending.
Held
The Tribunal held that the issue of substantive assessment was still pending and the impugned order should be set aside. The matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in confirming a protective assessment when the substantive assessment for a future year was still pending and whether adequate opportunity of hearing was provided.
Sections Cited
253, 143(3), 246A, 115BBE
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
the order bearing Number ITBA/APL/S/250/2024- 25/1070833292(1) dated 03.12.2024 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act which is hereinafter referred to as the “Impugned order”. The relevant Assessment Year is 2015-16
Page 1 of 5 and the corresponding previous year period is from 01.04.2014 to 31.03.2015.
FACTUAL MATRIX 2.1 That as and by way of an assessment order made u/s 143(3) of the Act, income of the assessee was computed at Rs.2,49,150/- on protective basis. The aforesaid assessment order is hereinafter referred to as “impugned assessment order” and same is dated 14.12.2017.
2.2 That the assessee being aggrieved by the aforesaid “impugned assessment order” prefers first appeal u/s 246A of the Act before Ld. CIT(A) who by the “impugned order” has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on grounds stated therein.
2.3 That the assessee being aggrieved by the “impugned order” has preferred the instant second appeal before this Tribunal and has raised following grounds of appeal in Form No.36 against the “impugned order” which are as under:-
“1. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and facts of the case and confirmed the action of A.O. assessing total income at Rs.2,49,150/- on protective basis and recorded the findings that the same amount shall be assessed on substantive basis during the A.Y. 2017-18.
2. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and facts of the case and failed to consider that protective assessment made by Assessing officer 2 for A.Y. 2015-16 and failed that the same amount shall be assessed for A.Y. 2017-18 and tax calculated as applicable of 115BBE.
That Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and facts of the case and failed to allow reasonable opportunity of hearing and ignored the 3 details and materials available with assessment records, the action therefore made is wrong and illegal on the facts of the case.
4. That Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and facts of the case and failed to examine merits of the case available from portal and assessment order.
5. That the appellant craves to leave, add, alter or amend any of the ground at or before hearing”.
3. Record of Hearing 3.1 The hearing in the matter took place before this Tribunal on 10.07.2025 when the Ld. AR for and on behalf of the assessee appeared before us and interalia contended that the “impugned order” is illegal, not proper and therefore it deserves to be set aside. Our attention was invited to the operative part of the “impugned assessment order” and basis that it was contended that assessed income is computed on protective basis at Rs.2,49,150/-. In so far as Assessment Year 2017-18 is concerned the issue of substantive assessment is pending and the matter is not yet fixed for hearing. Ld. DR appearing for the Revenue too concurred with the views expressed by the Ld. AR.
At the fag end of the hearing both the Ld. AR and the Ld. DR agreed that in view of peculiar facts and circumstances of the Page 3 of 5 case it would be fair and just that matter be set aside and issue can be relegated back to Ld. CIT(A).
Observations,findings & conclusions.
4.1 We now have to decide the legality, validity and the proprietary of the “Impugned Order” basis records of the case and rival contentions canvassed before us.
4.2 We have carefully perused the records of the case.
4.3 We basis records of the case and after hearing and upon examining the contentions are of the considered opinion that the “impugned order” should be set aside and accordingly we set aside the same as the issue of substantive assessment is still at large as informed to us by both the Ld. AR and the Ld. DR and that final hearing in that regard is pending (supra).
Hence we set aside the “impugned order” and direct the assessee to inform the lower authority about the present order of this Tribunal as and when the issue of substantive assessment for Assessment Year 2017-18 comes up for the final hearing.
Needless to state that both the Ld. AR as well as the Ld. DR have Page 4 of 5 agreed in the hearing to the aforesaid. Therefore the “impugned order” is set aside as and by way of remand back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with above direction.
Order 5.1 In view of the aforesaid the “impugned order” is set aside as and by way of remand to the file of Ld. CIT(A) on denovo basis with directions as aforesaid.
5.2 In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in open court on 17.07.2025.