1975 (12) TMI 85 - AT - Income Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Dismissal of the application under section 148 and confirmation of assessment under section 144 at Rs. 60,000 for the assessment year 1973-74.
2. Validity of the ex-parte assessment made due to the assessee's failure to file the return on time.
3. Consideration of whether the assessee had sufficient cause for not filing the return on time due to inability to obtain share income particulars from the firm.

Detailed Analysis:
1. The judgment involves the challenge against the orders of the AAC dismissing the application under section 148 and confirming the assessment under section 144 at Rs. 60,000 for the assessment year 1973-74. The assessee was initially served with a notice under section 139(2) and granted multiple extensions for filing the return. However, as the return was not filed, an ex-parte assessment was made. The assessee applied for cancellation of the ex-parte assessment under section 146, citing inability to obtain share income particulars from the firm as the reason for the delay in filing the return.

2. The Tribunal considered the contentions presented by the learned counsel for the assessee and the Departmental Representative. The counsel argued that the assessee, being a partner in multiple firms, could not file the return until the share income particulars were known. The Departmental Representative, however, contended that the assessee could have filed the return indicating the share income from the firm, which could later be adjusted as per the firm's assessment. The Tribunal acknowledged the negligence of the assessee in not seeking an extension for filing the return but emphasized that an ex-parte assessment cannot be solely based on this negligence.

3. The Tribunal analyzed the circumstances and legal precedents, including a ruling by the Karnataka High Court, to determine whether the assessee had sufficient cause for the delay in filing the return. It was noted that the firm, from which the assessee had a share income, had not finalized its accounts or filed its return until after the ex-parte assessment was made. Relying on the legal precedent, the Tribunal held that the inability to obtain share income particulars due to the firm's delay constituted sufficient cause for the failure to file the return on time. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the appeals, set aside the assessment under section 144, and directed a fresh assessment to be made.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the issues raised, the arguments presented by both parties, and the Tribunal's reasoning in reaching its decision.