2009 (12) TMI 218 - HC - Income Tax

Exemption- Agricultural income- The assessee declared its income as agricultural income for the assessment year 1995-96 to 1998-99 and claimed exemption from payment of tax. This was not accepted by the Revenue. Appeal filed to the Tribunal. Counsel of the assessee was not available at time of hearing. Managing Director of assessee contending appeal but not presenting case properly as having no expertise in taxation laws. Held that- set aside the order of Tribunal and remanded the matter to the Tribunal to decide afresh for all the assessment years. The court had not gone into the findings recorded by the Tribunal and had not made any comments thereagainst.

Summary

Issues:
Assessment of income as "agricultural income" for multiple years, reversal of assessment orders by Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), ex parte hearing leading to restoration of Assessing Officer's order by Tribunal, application for setting aside Tribunal's order, consideration of application by Tribunal, appeals against common judgment allowing Revenue's appeals and restoring Assessing Officer's order, lack of opportunity for effective submissions by appellant, decision to hear all appeals together due to identical questions involved.

Analysis:
The appellant had filed income-tax returns for multiple years, declaring income as "agricultural income" to claim exemption from income tax. However, the Assessing Officer found the income not to be agricultural and levied tax, initiating penalty proceedings. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) reversed the assessment orders, leading to the Department filing appeals before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal.

The Tribunal heard one appeal ex parte due to the absence of the assessee and restored the Assessing Officer's order. Upon learning of this, the assessee applied to set aside the order, citing sufficient cause for non-appearance. The Tribunal rejected this application, prompting a writ petition that directed the Tribunal to reconsider the application.

Subsequently, the Tribunal allowed the application, leading to the ex parte orders being set aside. However, the appeals against a common judgment dated November 11, 2005, were filed by the Revenue, resulting in the restoration of the Assessing Officer's order. The Tribunal considered the facts of the case and found no agricultural income for the appellant in the assessment years in question.

The appellant argued that they were unable to make effective submissions during the appeals due to the absence of their counsel, leading to a lack of expertise in taxation laws. In light of this, the Court decided to hear all appeals together with the 1995-96 appeal, as the issues were identical. The Court clarified that they did not review the Tribunal's findings and left it to the Tribunal to consider the aspects noted in their previous order. The submissions made by the appellant during arguments would be duly considered in deciding the matters afresh.

In conclusion, the Court disposed of the appeals with the observation that all appeals would be heard together to ensure justice and proper consideration of the appellant's submissions.