DEBASHISH PATTNAYAK,BHUBANESWAR vs. CIT(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), BHUBNAESWAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4/CTK/2021Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack18 May 2022AY 2010-115 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the intimation under Section 143(1) incorrectly treated the exempt salary income of the NRI seafarer as taxable. Despite the delay in filing the rectification application, the Tribunal allowed the appeal in the interest of substantial justice, as the assessee was prevented from filing within the prescribed time due to non-service of the intimation.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a seafarer, claimed his salary income as exempt. The intimation under Section 143(1) processed his income as taxable, and the assessee's subsequent rectification application was dismissed as time-barred. The assessee claimed the intimation was not served until much later.

What were the issues?

Whether the income of an NRI seafarer is taxable in India and if an intimation under Section 143(1) can override a claimed exemption. The issue also concerns the condonation of delay in filing a rectification application when the intimation was not properly served.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA

Hearing: 18/05/2022Pronounced: 18/05/2022

Shri A. Prabhakar Rao, AR for the assessee Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr.DR for the Revenue Date of Hearing : 18/05/2022 Date of Pronouncement : 18/05/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These are the appeals filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the ld. CIT(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, all dated 13.03.2020 for the assessment years 2007-2008, 2008-2009 and 2010-2011.

2.

At the outset, we found that all the three appeals filed by the assessee are barred by 190 days each. In this regard, the assessee has filed application for condonation of delay along with affidavit stating the reasons for delay in filing the appeals. Ld. Sr.DR did not have any 2 objection to condone the delay occurred in filing the instant appeals. Accordingly, we condone the delay of 190 days each in filing all the three appeals and the appeals are heard finally.

3.

It was the submission of the ld. AR of the assessee that the assessee is a searfarer and filed his return of income for the relevant assessment year and the same came to be processed u/s.143(1) of the Act on 10.02.2010 for the assessment years 2007-08, 10.02.2010 for A.Y. 2008-09 & on 07.06.2011 for A.Y.2010-11. The said intimations were not served on the assessee. It was the submission that when a demand note was noticed in the assessee’s e-portal, the assessee filed a rectification application u/s.154 of the Act on 17.07.2017 for all the three assessment years. In the intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act, though the assessee had shown his income as not taxable, the intimation had been processed by treating his income from salary received by him as a seafarer and NRI as taxable income. It was the submission that the application u/s.154 of the Act filed by the assessee came to be dismissed by the ld. AO on 26.03.2018 on the ground that the applications u/s.154 of the Act were beyond the four years period from the end of the financial year, in which the intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act was passed. It was the submission that the assessee has been served with the intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act in the form of certified true copy on 20.01.2021. It was the prayer of the ld. AR that as the assessee has already filed an appeal before the Tribunal against the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) rejecting the appeal against rejection of the application u/s.154 of the Act, the assessee had 3 not filed an appeal against the intimation, now served on him in the form of certified copy on 20.01.2021. It was also the prayer of the ld. AR of the assessee that the assessee may be granted opportunity to file an appeal against the intimations u/s.143(1) for the assessment years 2007-08, 208- 09 & 2010-2011, respectively, which has been received by the assessee on 20.01.2021.

4.

Alternatively, it was the submission of the ld. AR of the assessee that what is taxable is only real income and the assessee’s income from salary from his profession as a seafarer was not taxable at all insofar as the assessee was a non-resident of Indian. It was the further submission that the intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act had not been served on the assessee and the issue of treating the income shown by the assessee as his NRI income, which is not taxable in India as part of the total income for the purpose of the taxable could not have been done by an intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act. It was also the prayer that when substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred. It was the prayer that the assessee’s salary income, which is an exempt income as the assessee was an NRI at that point of time may kindly be directed to be deleted from the total income as computed by the AO in the intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act in the interest of natural justice.

5.

In reply, the ld. DR vehemently supported the order of the AO and CIT(A). It was the submission that though the ld. DR was sympathetic to the case of the assessee, however, a rectification application u/s.154 of

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →