Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a Tribal individual and proprietor of Lushai Engineers, did not file an income tax return for AY 2017-18. Reassessment proceedings were initiated based on high-value transactions, leading to an ex-parte assessment and significant additions as the assessee failed to comply with notices. The CIT(A)/NFAC confirmed the additions, mistakenly treating Lushai Engineers as a partnership firm.
Held
The Tribunal noted the assessee's claim of being a Tribal person eligible for Section 10(26) exemption and that Lushai Engineers is a proprietary concern. Due to the assessee's lack of awareness and non-participation, the Tribunal remitted the matter back to the NFAC for de novo adjudication, granting the assessee a fresh opportunity to present evidence and substantiate claims. The CIT(A) order was set aside.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee, a tribal individual, is eligible for exemption under Section 10(26) and if Lushai Engineers is a sole proprietary concern or a partnership firm. Whether the ex-parte assessment was justified given the assessee's lack of awareness and opportunity to present evidence.
Sections Cited
Section 250, Section 147, Section 144, Section 144B, Section 139(1), Section 148, Section 143(3), Section 142(1), Section 10(26)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, GUWAHATI BENCH, GUWAHATI
Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS
आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
The captioned appeal pertaining to Assessment Year 2017- 18 at the instance of assessee is directed against the order dated 19.03.2024 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) which in turn is arising out of Assessment Order Michael C Lalmuanpuia dated 22.03.2022 passed u/s.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Act.
Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is stated to be proprietor of the firm Lushai Engineers carrying on the business of Construction Contractor in Mizoram. The assessee belongs to a Tribunal community and did not file the return of income u/s.139(1) of the Act. Based on the information available as per CIB/26AS, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee made following transactions :
S.No. Nature of Transaction Amount involved 1 Deposit in Current account 8503620 2 Cash withdrawal from 120686263 cash account 3 Investment in Mutual Fund 9913373 4 Interest Income 161145 2.1 Statutory notice u/s.148 was served after recording satisfaction and obtaining permission from the competent authority. Notices u/s.143(3)/142(1) were also served on the assesssee, however, there was no compliance by the assessee. In the circumstances, ld. AO was constrained to complete the Michael C Lalmuanpuia assessment u/s.147 r.w.s.144 of the Act after making various additions aggregating to Rs.61,11,71,160/-.
Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal before the ld.CIT(A)/NFAC who vide impugned order affirmed the action of the Assessing Officer in making additions.
Now the assessee is in appeal before us.
At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that there were certain additional evidences which the assessee intends to file before this Tribunal which goes to the root of the matter and an opportunity may be granted for going before the ld.CIT(A)/NFAC for examining of the evidences. He also submitted that the ld.CIT(A)/NFAC has treated the concern namely Lushai Engineers as a Partnership firm however it is a sole proprietary concern of the assessee who is a Tribunal person and eligible for exemption u/s.10(26) of the Act.
On the other hand, ld. Departmental Representative vehemently argued supporting the orders of the authorities below.
We have heard both the sides and perused the record placed before us. We note that the assessee is claiming to be a Tribal person and is contending from the beginning that due to Michael C Lalmuanpuia his ignorance and wrong advice PAN was wrongly applied in the name of Firm Lushai Engineers as a Partnership Firm. Otherwise, it is submitted that the assessee is eligible for exemption u/s.10(26) of the Act. The appellant is not well conversant with the procedure and income-tax laws and therefore was not aware of the notices of hearing. Thus, he could not participate in the proceedings which resulted in passing of exparte orders. It is the submission of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that the assessee can file all the details along with evidences to substantiate his claims to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer. Considering the facts and circumstances prevailing in the instant case, without dwelling into merits of the case, the issues on merits are being remitted back to the file of ld. NFAC for denovo adjudication after affording reasonable opportunities to the appellant, in accordance with law. If necessary, the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC may call for the remand report from the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and obtain the objections from the assessee to such remand report and decide the case. The assessee is at liberty to file any evidence in support of his claim as deemed expedient. The assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause, failing which the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC shall be free to proceed in Michael C Lalmuanpuia accordance with law. Finding of the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is set aside and Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 20th day of January, 2025.