2023 (6) TMI 570 - AT - Income Tax

Validity of Income Escaping assessment u/s 147 - notice u/s 143(2) was not issued - ITR not filled on online portal - since the assessee filed the return manually, it was not possible for the revenue authorities to replicate the return on the system and the same was communicated to the assessee vide letter - HELD THAT - The requirement of notice u/s 143(2) comes into effect only when the assessee has filed the return in compliance to the notice u/s 148 and to carry out the scrutiny proceedings AO should issue notice u/s 143(2) since it is a statutory requirement. In the instant case, the assessee has not filed the return as required under the Income-tax Act on the online portal and the manual return filed by the assessee is no return in terms of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, the ld. Assessing Officer was not required to issue any notice u/s 143(2) of the Act. Thus, Ground No. 1 raised by the assessee is dismissed. Proceedings initiated u/s 147 without application of mind and simply accepting the information without any further enquiry - No merit in this ground of the assessee because once the reasons were issued to the assessee sufficient opportunity was provided to establish the source of credits in the bank account stated in the information received from the Investigation unit - no mechanism for the income tax authorities to examine the fact that the alleged two bank accounts have been disclosed in the regular books of accounts and the credits appearing therein have not be taken into the books for the purpose of calculating the income, thus reopening proceedings were initiated with proper application of mind. Assessee was not provided reasonable opportunity of being heard - Assessee has not filed the financial statement of the sole proprietorship concerns as to whether they have been disclosed in the return of income. No details have been filed about the nature of business being carried out in these two proprietorship concerns and what is the profit being offered in the regular income tax return of such type of receipts. All through the proceedings before the lower authorities and before us, no specific details have been filed except copy of bank statement which does not indicate communication relevant for arriving at the income of the assessee. Thus restore the issue of merits to the ld. CIT(A), before whom, the assessee shall file all the supporting documents to establish that the alleged credits in the two bank accounts are business receipts, all the other entries in the bank account other than credits are also to be explained as to whether they are for purchasing the goods - Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are related to the validity of assessment proceedings, the initiation of proceedings under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the confirmation of assessment without providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard, the basis of additions made by the Assessing Officer, and the validity of the entire addition made by the Assessing Officer.

Validity of Assessment Proceedings:
The appellant contended that the assessment proceedings were invalid as notice under section 143(2) of the Act was not issued. However, the Tribunal found that the appellant was required to file the income-tax return online as per the notice under section 148 of the Act. Since the appellant filed a manual return instead of online, which was not in compliance with the Income-tax Act, the Assessing Officer was not required to issue a notice under section 143(2) of the Act. Therefore, the Tribunal dismissed this ground raised by the appellant.

Initiation of Proceedings under Section 147:
The appellant argued that the proceedings initiated under section 147 of the Act lacked application of mind and were based on accepting information without further inquiry. However, the Tribunal observed that once reasons were issued to the appellant, sufficient opportunity was provided to establish the source of credits in the bank accounts. The Tribunal held that the reopening proceedings were initiated with proper application of mind, and the CIT(A) rightly confirmed the validity of the reassessment proceedings. Consequently, this ground raised by the appellant was dismissed.

Confirmation of Assessment without Reasonable Opportunity:
The appellant raised grounds contending that they were not provided with a reasonable opportunity to be heard. The appellant argued that the alleged credits in the bank accounts were business receipts and the Assessing Officer should have estimated the net profit. However, the appellant failed to provide specific details or financial statements to support their claims. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to restore the issue of merits to the CIT(A) for further examination based on supporting documents and details to establish the nature of the alleged credits. Ground Nos. 3, 4 & 5 were allowed for statistical purposes.

Basis of Additions Made by Assessing Officer:
The appellant challenged the entire addition made by the Assessing Officer, arguing that only the profit element on the receipts should have been added. However, the Tribunal noted the lack of specific details and supporting documents provided by the appellant to substantiate their claims. The issue was restored to the CIT(A) for a more thorough examination based on the necessary documentation and information to determine the validity of the additions made by the Assessing Officer.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal of the appellant for statistical purposes, emphasizing the importance of providing comprehensive details and supporting documents to substantiate claims during assessment proceedings. The decision was pronounced in the Court on 9th June 2023 at Kolkata.