2021 (6) TMI 885 - AT - Income Tax

Revision u/s 263 - assessee could not appear due to severe ill-health of the assessee's wife who expired on 24/01/2015 - HELD THAT - As appears from the record that during the relevant period when the Ld. AO had taken up the second round of proceedings based on the orders of the Ld. CIT-IV, Hyderabad passed u/s.263 the assessee was not in a position to appear before the Ld. Revenue Authorities because of his sever ill-health and demise of his wife. Considering the issues involved in the appeal as well as the prayer of the Ld. AR, in the interest of justice, we hereby remit the entire matter back to the file of Ld. A.O. in order to consider the appeal afresh on merits by providing one more opportunity to the assessee of being heard. We also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate before the Revenue Authorities in their proceedings failing which the Ld. Revenue Authorities shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and merits based on the materials on the record.

Summary

Issues:
1. Revision order passed under section 263 of the Income Tax Act disallowing a sum for deduction.
2. Deduction claimed under the wrong head due to an error in understanding the heads of income.
3. Ex-parte assessment order passed due to the non-appearance of the petitioner.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Revision order under section 263
The appeal was filed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-4, Hyderabad, challenging the revision order passed under section 263 of the Income Tax Act. The appellant contended that the sum disallowed as not eligible for deduction was utilized in the proprietary business and should be allowed as a deduction. The appellant argued that the CIT misconstrued the contentions and the deductions claimed were legitimate. The Tribunal remitted the matter back to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration due to the appellant's inability to appear during the proceedings because of personal reasons.

Issue 2: Deduction claimed under the wrong head
The appellant claimed a deduction under the wrong head of income due to an error in understanding the heads of income. The appellant argued that the interest paid to banks, chit fund companies, and financial institutions should have been deducted from the income earned from the proprietorship business. The Tribunal acknowledged the merit in the appellant's submissions and decided to remit the matter back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment on merits, providing the appellant with an opportunity to be heard.

Issue 3: Ex-parte assessment order
The ex-parte assessment order was passed as the appellant did not appear before the Assessing Officer due to personal reasons, specifically the ill-health and subsequent demise of the appellant's wife. The appellant sought permission to add, alter, or amend the grounds of appeal during the pendency of the case. The Tribunal considered the circumstances and remitted the matter back to the Assessing Officer to allow the appellant a fair opportunity to present their case and cooperate in the proceedings. The Tribunal cautioned the appellant to cooperate promptly, failing which appropriate orders would be passed based on the materials available on record.

In conclusion, the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, and the matter was remitted back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment, emphasizing the importance of the appellant's cooperation in the proceedings.