TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (6) TMI 1313
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n was received by the AO from the Income Tax Officer (Inv.), Unit-V(5), New Delhi vide letter dated 28.3.2008, which was based on the report received from the entertainment tax department, Government of Delhi, that the assessee was having over 28000 subscribers whereas he was paying tax in respect of 2000 subscribers only. Further on the basis of the above facts, the Entertainment Tax Officer, Delhi had passed an assessment order on 17.12.2002 as per which a demand of Rs. 3,86,82,000/- was raised on account of entertainment tax + penalty + interest for the period of January 2000 to March 2001. After recording reasons based on these information, notice u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act was issued, but no compliance was made by the assessee. The notice u/s. 148 was followed by several notices, which were also remained non-complied with. On 06.8.2008 summons u/s. 131 was issued for personal deposition of the appellant and the case was fixed for hearing on 19.8.2008. In response the appellant did not appear personally but Sh. Pradeep Saluja, CA appeared on his behalf before the AO on 19.8.2008 and filed a letter seeking adjournment on the ground of illness of assessee's wife. On scheduled....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts, on account of various expenditure incurred, for earning the above income. In this way your taxable income for the year under consideration comes to Rs. 3,36.00,000/-. In case of further non-compliance, the case will be decided exparte on the basis of above. 2.4 The case was fixed for hearing on 26.12.2008, when again there was no compliance and the AO completed the assessment u/s. 144/147 of the Act at a total income of Rs. 3,36,00,000/-. 3. Aggrieved with the said order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). 3.1 The Ld. CIT(A) reduced the said addition to Rs. 1,20,06,010/-. The relevant extract of the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is reproduced as under: " 6.4 The appellant has contested that he was having just 2000 cable connections based on the ground that he was not having authorization from his principal broadcaster beyond 2000 connections, so how can he give 28000 connections. Here one relevant fact, which is of utmost importance, is that during that period set top boxes were not in operation. Hence, the principal channel like Star, ESPN etc. were not having any means to control the number of connection the operator was running. The operator was ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e the fact that the number of connections are directly proportional to the residential density of the arca. For example Pitampura, Rohini are most dense whereas Narela, Shakarpu rand and other localities are comparatively less dense. Having said that 28000 connections appear to be a reasonable figure, the profit is to be worked out based on reasonable estimate. The inspector of the Assessing Officer conducted a local enquiry and reported that the appellant was charging Rs. 200/- per month during the relevant period. Total number of cable subscribers -28000 Total monthly subscription recovered -28000 x 200 Total annual subscription received by Appellant - 28000 x 12 x 200-=Rs. 6.72,00,000/- The AO has assessed the income of the appellant at Rs. 3,36,00,000/- by reducing the 50% on account of meeting the business expenses. The appellant was also charging the initial installation charges, security, which were not taken into consideration while calculating the profit. The appellant is running this business since 1994. Keeping in mind the nature of the business, the infrastructure cost is less in this type of business and if at all there is any, this is ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Tribunal has jurisdiction to examine a question of law which arises from the fact as found by authority below and having bearing on tax liability of the assessee even through such question was not raised before authority below nor in grounds in appeal but raised by way of additional issue in forwarding letter. 5. Assessing Officer without verifying correctness of claim of assessee proceeded completely on estimate basis and made addition by taking higher number of cable connection subscriber, such addition deserved to be deleted. 6. That the assessee craves to add/alter any of the grounds of appeal on or before the date of final hearing." 5. The Ld. AR during the course of hearing before us submitted that on similar facts, the Co-ordinate Bench of Tribunal in ITA No.-9432/Del/2019 had deleted similar addition for A.Y. 2003-04. 5.1 Further, the Ld. AR submitted that the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in ITA No.- 9431/Del/2019 for A.Y. 2001-02 had restored the matter to the file of the AO, where the AO after verifying the facts had completed the assessment at the returned income. 6. On the other hand, the Ld. Sr. DR supported the orders of the authorities....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....edings have been initiated in the case as per the provisions of section 147 of the Act. The assessment / reassessment proceedings were completed on 22.12.2009 as per the provisions of section 147 read with section 144 (ex-parte) of the Act, and total income has been ascertained at Rs. 48,50,350/-. The additions were made on the basis of estimation as the assessee has not co-operated during the entire period of re-assessment proceedings. 3. The assessment order passed by the then AO has not been accepted by the assessee, and an appeal has been preferred before the Ld. CIT(A) - 34, Delhi. The Ld. CIT(A)-34, Delhi, vide order dated 12.09.2019 (in Appeal No. 1/446/09-10), has dismissed the appeal of the assessee primarily on the grounds that the assessee has not attended the appellate proceedings despite granting ample opportunities for being heard. 3.1 The assessee has further challenged the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-34, Delhi, before the Hon'ble ITAT, Delhi. Now, the Hon'ble ITAT, Bench-SMC, Delhi, vide order dated 23.01.2023 in ITA No. 9431/DEL/2019, has restored back the file to the AO for fresh adjudication after giving reasonable opportunity to the assesse....