2020 (8) TMI 588 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal allows appeal, questions CIT's decision under IT Act, emphasizes evidence evaluation in tax matters.

Shri Anees Shareef Kunju Versus The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-1, Kollam

Shri Anees Shareef Kunju Versus The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-1, Kollam - TMI Issues:1. Condonation of delay in filing appeal before the Tribunal.2. Assessment of deemed turnover and tax implications under section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act.3. Validity of the order passed under section 263 of the IT Act by the Principal CIT.Condonation of Delay in Filing Appeal:The appeal filed by the assessee was directed against the order of the Principal CIT passed under section 263 of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2014-15. The assessee faced a delay of 245 days in filing the appeal due to the illness and subsequent demise of the authorized representative. The Tribunal, after considering the reasons provided, condoned the delay and admitted the appeal for adjudication, noting that there were sufficient grounds for the delay.Assessment of Deemed Turnover and Tax Implications:The Principal CIT, upon subsequent verification, found discrepancies in the turnover declared by the assessee for the assessment year 2014-15. The Assessing Officer had added an amount to the returned income due to excess cash deposits over the turnover amount, treating it as deemed turnover. However, the Principal CIT deemed this treatment erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue's interests. The CIT directed the Assessing Officer to treat the excess cash deposits as unexplained cash credits under section 68 and apply a special tax rate of 30% as per section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal observed that the CIT pre-decided the issue and remitted the matter back to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration to determine the applicability of section 68 to the assessee's case based on proof of transactions' genuineness.Validity of Order under Section 263 of the IT Act:The assessee challenged the order passed under section 263 of the IT Act on various grounds, including lack of opportunity to produce confirmation letters and disagreement with the CIT's treatment of cash credits as undisclosed turnover. The Tribunal found that the CIT had prematurely decided the applicability of section 68 without proper assessment. The Tribunal vacated the CIT's finding and remitted the issue to the Assessing Officer for reevaluation, emphasizing the need for a fair opportunity for the assessee to present evidence. The appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes based on these considerations.In conclusion, the Tribunal addressed the issues of delay in filing the appeal, the assessment of deemed turnover, and the validity of the order under section 263 of the IT Act. The decision highlighted the importance of fair assessment procedures and the need for proper evaluation of evidence before making tax-related determinations.