2020 (4) TMI 567 - AT - Income Tax

Maintainability of appeal before CIT(A) u/s 249 (4)(b) - failure to pay advance tax - it is the say of the counsel that the income of the assessee was below the taxable limit and, therefore, the assessee was under no obligation to pay advance tax as per the provisions of the law - HELD THAT - Once the assessee alleged that his income is not taxable during the provisions of the Act there cannot be any obligation upon the assessee to pay advance tax. Our view is fortified by the affidavit of the assessee filed before us - first appellate authority has not decided the appeal on merits of the case, therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play restore the appeal to the files of the CIT(A) as directed to decide the appeal afresh on the grounds raised - Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purposes.

Issues involved:
1. Competency of the appeal under Section 249(4)(b) of the Income Tax Act.
2. Non-admittance of the appeal by the CIT(A).
3. Re-assessment proceedings based on reasons recorded under Section 148.
4. Addition of cash deposit in the bank account.
5. Jurisdiction of the appeal.

Analysis:

Competency of the appeal under Section 249(4)(b) of the Income Tax Act:
The appeal by the assessee challenged the CIT(A)'s decision invoking Section 249(4)(b), which led to the non-admittance of the appeal. The CIT(A) held that the appeal cannot be admitted due to non-compliance with Section 249(4)(b), which is discretionary relief. The ITAT found that the assessee's income was below the taxable limit, relieving them from the obligation to pay advance tax. The ITAT emphasized that non-taxable income does not necessitate advance tax payment, and the appeal should be considered based on its competency.

Non-admittance of the appeal by the CIT(A):
The ITAT noted that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without deciding on the merits of the case. The ITAT, in the interest of justice and fair play, directed the appeal to be restored to the files of the CIT(A) for a fresh decision after providing a reasonable opportunity for the assessee to be heard. The ITAT emphasized the importance of deciding the appeal on its grounds and merits before dismissing it.

Re-assessment proceedings based on reasons recorded under Section 148:
The appeal raised concerns regarding the re-assessment proceedings initiated under Section 148 without providing reasons recorded within the stipulated time frame. The ITAT highlighted the necessity of fulfilling the provisions of reassessment and the requirement for a valid reason to believe under Section 148(2) for initiating re-assessment proceedings.

Addition of cash deposit in the bank account:
The ITAT addressed the addition of a significant cash deposit in the bank account, arguing that it was contrary to facts as the assessee had both deposited and withdrawn cash. The ITAT deemed the addition unlawful and ordered its deletion, emphasizing the need for factual accuracy in such assessments.

Jurisdiction of the appeal:
The ITAT concluded by treating the appeal as allowed for statistical purposes, emphasizing the importance of jurisdiction in the appeal process. The ITAT's decision highlighted the necessity of fair opportunities for the assessee and the proper consideration of grounds raised in the appeal.

In conclusion, the ITAT's judgment focused on the competency of the appeal, the necessity of deciding on the merits of the case, adherence to procedural requirements for re-assessment, accuracy in additions to income, and ensuring fair opportunities for the parties involved in the appeal process.

← Previous Next →