1977 (11) TMI 70 - AT - Income Tax

Summary

Issues:
Appeals against S.M.R. Nos. 16,17, and 18/78-74 of the Asstt. CCT, Bangalore City Division under the Karnataka ST Act, 1957 for the years 1969-70, 1970-71, and 1971-72. Revisional authority's dismissal of applications under s. 21(1) of the Act. Justification of assessing authority's orders. Estimation of turnovers. Dismissal of revision petitions. Consideration of applications filed by the appellant.

Analysis:

The judgment delivered by the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Bangalore involved three appeals challenging the orders of the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Asstt. CCT) for the years 1969-70, 1970-71, and 1971-72 under the Karnataka ST Act, 1957. The appeals were clubbed together as the points in question were similar.

The revisional authority had dismissed the appellant's applications under section 21(1) of the Act, claiming that the assessing authority's orders were baseless and unsustainable. The appellant argued that the assessing authority's conclusions were incorrect, especially regarding ex-parte assessments and arbitrary turnovers. However, the revisional authority found no irregularity in the assessing authority's orders and dismissed the revisional petitions.

In the grounds of appeal, the appellant contended that the assessment orders were not based on facts, and the turnovers estimated were arbitrary. The appellant's representative argued that due to civil litigation and attachment of properties, the appellant could not file returns or produce account books. The State Representative argued that the appellant had not responded to notices, leading to the assessments.

Upon examination of the records and hearing both parties, the Tribunal focused on whether the revisional authority was justified in dismissing the appellant's applications to exercise suo motu powers. The Tribunal found that while opportunities were given for the assessment, the assessing authority failed to provide a basis or material for turnover estimation. Considering the appellant's circumstances, including civil litigation and attachment of the shop, the Tribunal concluded that the assessing authority's orders were improper and irregular.

As a result, the Tribunal set aside the assessing authority's orders and the suo motu order of the Asstt. CCT, remanding the case back for fresh disposal in accordance with the law. The appeals were allowed, and the cases were remanded to the assessing authority, with no refund of the institution fee.