Loading judgment…
Facts
The appeal was filed by the assessee challenging an order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The assessee's counsel did not press grounds 1, 3, and 4. Ground 2 concerned an order setting aside the assessment order and directing the Assessing Officer to verify short-term capital gains.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the directions given by the Ld. Commissioner were conditional on the assessee's non-cooperation and default. The Tribunal clarified that these directions would only apply if the assessee committed a default, and not otherwise.
Key Issues
Whether the conditional directions issued by the Ld. Commissioner in the impugned order are applicable only in case of assessee's default, or have a broader application.
Sections Cited
144, 147
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY
The present appeal has been filed by the Assessee challenging the impugned order dated 24/12/2024, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [for short “ld. Commissioner )”] for the assessment year 2009–10.
2 Smt. Kanchan Kishore Jham ITA no.92/Nag./2025
During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the Assessee did not press grounds no.1, 3 and 4. Consequently, these grounds are dismissed as “not pressed”.
Coming to ground no. 2, it is observed that though, the ld. Commissioner has set aside the assessment order dated 16/03/2015, under section 144 r/w section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act") and directed the Assessing Officer to verify the issue of short term capital gain of ₹ 28,83,862/- earned during the financial year 2008–09 and pass the assessment order de-novo.
The Ld. Commissioner in Para–4.3 of the impugned order, has also given following directions:–
“4.3 …….. In case, the appellant remains non-cooperative during these proceedings also, the AO may proceed to treat the above transactions as unexplained as per law and determine the tax demand applying the correct rates of tax. The AO is also directed to initiate recovery proceedings by provisionally attaching the property of the appellant as per due legal procedure to protect the interest of the revenue. Thus, the case of the appellant is set aside to the file of the AO for de-novo consideration.”
This Court observe that the Ld. Commissioner has made the observations under specific facts and circumstances, as the assessee before the Assessing Officer remained non–compliant and failed to file the relevant submissions and/or documents. Whatever it may be, the Ld. Commissioner has given direction in hypothesis
3 Smt. Kanchan Kishore Jham ITA no.92/Nag./2025 situation, which would only be applicable, on committing default by the Assessee but not otherwise. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the directions would be applicable, only on committing default if any by the Assessee but not otherwise. Thus, the appeal filed by the Assessee is disposed of in the said terms/ clarification, for the limited purpose only.
In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is disposed off with the aforesaid clarification. Order pronounced in the open Court on 19/06/2025