9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Assessment made as a protective measure. 2. Nature of assessment - regular or protective. Detailed Analysis: 1. The main issue in this appeal was regarding an assessment made by the Income Tax Officer (ITO) on the assessee as a protective measure. The assessee, an individual, had filed her return of income showing income from a contract business. The ITO, during assessment proceedings, required the assessee to appear before him to verify the business claimed by her. Despite repeated opportunities, the assessee did not appear, while her husband stated that the business was now carried on by the assessee under his supervision. The ITO concluded that the business belonged to the husband and assessed the income in his hands. The assessment on the assessee was made on a protective basis, including loans and applying a net profit rate. 2. The second issue revolved around whether the assessment on the assessee should be treated as a regular assessment. The assessee contended before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (AAC) that the assessment should be regular, not protective. The AAC upheld the protective assessment and certain additions but reduced the net profit rate. The assessee then appealed to the Tribunal, arguing that the assessment should be regular. The Tribunal noted that the ITO had initiated proceedings against the assessee's husband but had not yet framed an assessment. The assessee relied on legal precedents to support her argument for a regular assessment. The department, however, supported the protective assessment citing the authority's discretion to do so. The Tribunal set aside the AAC's order, directing a fresh decision after ascertaining the ITO's actions in the husband's case, emphasizing the need for a fair hearing for the assessee. In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, emphasizing the importance of a fair assessment process and the need for proper consideration of facts before determining the nature of an assessment.
|
