×Latest Case Laws on Income Tax by various Income Tax Appellate Tribunals in India
These are the latest case laws decided by various Income Tax Appellate Tribunals (ITAT) of India on Income Tax which have been published recently. The case laws are open for discussion and we invite expert comments from our members on its applicability and effect on relevant issues.
(A) This appeal by Revenue is filed against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XXX, New Delhi, [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short], dated 31.01.2013 for Assessment Year 2004-05. The grounds of appeal are as under:
“On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in:-
(i) Deleting the addition of Rs. 2,32,09,544/- as rightly made by the AO on the basis of authentic information in his possession though the assessee failed to appear and explain during the assessment proceedings.
(ii) Accepting the assessee contention that he has earned this income from his employer, without proper evidence.
(iii) The appellant craves the right to alter, amend, add or substitute the grounds of appeal.”
(B) Assessment Order was passed on 27/12/2011 under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“IT Act”, for short). In the Assessment Order all credit entries for the period 01/04/2003 to 31/03/2004 reflected in assessee’s City Bank Account No. 5708929222, amounting to total of Rs. 2,32,09,544/- were treated as assessee’s income and assessment was made accordingly treating the aforesaid amount of Rs. 2,32,09,544/- as assessee’s total income assessable to tax in India. Aggrieved, the Assessee filed appeal before the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XXX, New Delhi. Vide consolidated order dated 31/01/2013 for Assessment Years 2004-05 and 2005-06, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the aforesaid addition of Rs. 2,32,09,544/- for Assessment Year 2004-05. Relevant portion of the aforesaid impugned order dated 31/01/2012 of the Ld. CIT(A) is reproduced as under:
“2. In response to the appeal notice u/s 250 of the I.T. Act, the Appellant ‘s Authorized Representative Sh. Abhijit Chalia, appellant, Sh. Gaurav Jain, CA & Sh. Pravat Lath, CA for hearing with written submissions, judgments and other evidences. The case was discussed with them.
3. The written submissions of the AR dated 31.01.2013 is produced as under for reference:
"We refer to the captioned appeals filed before your office. In connection with the same, on behalf of and under instructions of our subject client and in continuation to our earlier submission dated January 10, 2013, January 28, 2013 and January 30, 2013, we would like to submit a summary, which is as under:
A Tax Evasion Petition dated January 22, 2007 was filed by the estranged wife of the appellant against him with the DDIT, Unit-V(l) alleging that the appellant has concealed particulars of his foreign sourced income which were not offered to tax in India. Basis the same, an assessment order was passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle - 48(1), New Delhi under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 on December 27, 2011 for Assessment Year (‘AY’) 2004-05 and 2005-06.
Facts relevant for consideration
A summary of the details filed with your goodself vide various submissions has been provided in the table below Further, the appellant would like to submit that he was physically harmed in the Court premises during the divorce proceedings and suffered severe permanent damage in his left eye. This shows how malicious the proceedings had become and that various complaints had been made against the appellant before various authorities which were all driven with an intention to malign the image of the appellant without any real substance. A copy of a certificate issued by the appellant’s General Practitioner certifying that he suffered a penetrating injury to his left eye is enclosed as Annexure 1.
4. I have perused the assessment order, grounds of appeals, written submission and remand report and discussed the matter with the AR of the assessee very carefully. The appellant also appeared before me in the course of hearing. The appellant had taken about 9 grounds of appeal for the A.Y. 2004-05 and 10 grounds of appeal for the A.Y. 2005-06. The appellant .vas away from India and was working in USA for the period 01.08 2003 to 31.07.2004. He was working with a company called Tekelec, wno had confirmed this facts vide its letter dated 16.01.2013. His letter is re-produced for ready reference:-