ZAKIRA KAMIL,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-63(3), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6273/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 April 2019AY 2014-155 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the issue to the Assessing Officer, directing the assessee to produce audited books of account and comply with queries. The Assessing Officer was instructed to decide the issue afresh after providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer rejected the assessee's books of account due to non-compliance and estimated profit at 2% on a turnover of Rs. 6.68 crores. The CIT(A) confirmed this order ex-parte as the assessee did not attend the appellate proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether the estimation of profit by the Assessing Officer was justified without proper consideration of the audited books of account, and whether the ex-parte orders passed by the lower authorities were fair.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 44AB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI ‘SMC’ BENCH,

Before: SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Goel, CA
Hearing: 22.04.2019Pronounced: 23.04.2019

PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals] - 20, New Delhi dated 27.07.2018 pertaining to A.Y 2014-15.

2.

The sum and substance of the grievance of the assessee is that the CIT(A) erred in confirming the assessment order, thereby confirming the estimation of profit made by the Assessing Officer @ 2%.

3.

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessment order dated 23.12.2016 is framed u/s 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act']. During the course of scrutiny assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer sought certain details which were not complied with. The Assessing Officer was left with no choice but to reject the books of account and estimate the profit on the total turnover of Rs. 6.68 crores. Accordingly, profit was estimated @ 2%.

4.

The assessee carried the matter before the CIT(A) but did not attend the proceedings and the CIT(A) was also compelled to frame the appellate order exparte and confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer.

5.

Before me, the ld. AR stated that the assessee is maintaining regular books of account which were subjected to audit u/s 44AB of the Act. It is the say of the ld. AR that due to some exceptional circumstances, the assessment proceedings as well as the appellate proceedings could not be attended properly. The ld. AR prayed for restoring the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer so that the assessee can produce audited books of account and comply with the queries of the Assessing Officer.

6.

The ld. DR fairly conceded to this plea of the assessee.

7.

I have carefully considered the orders of the authorities below. There is no dispute that both the lower authorities have decided the issue exparte. In the interest of justice and fair play, I deem it fit to restore this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer. The assessee is directed to produce the books of account and comply with all the queries raised by the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer is directed to decide the issue afresh after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

8.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in is allowed for statistical purposes. The order is pronounced in the open court on 23.04.2019.

More judgments on Section 44AB

All 2,486 judgments and leading authorities on Section 44AB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →