The
assessee, an individual, filed an appeal against the order passed by the
National Faceless Appeal Centre for Assessment Year 2020–21, wherein an
addition of ₹25,58,770 was sustained by treating receipts as income from house
property. The return of income was originally filed declaring total income of
₹5,81,630, and the case was selected under the e-verification scheme.
During
verification, discrepancies were noticed between the gross receipts declared
under section 44AD and the receipts reflected in the information available on
record. Subsequently, the assessment was reopened under section 147, and
reassessment proceedings were carried out after issuance of notice under
section 148.
The
assessee contended that the receipts were earned from providing shooting
locations to television, film, and media production houses and constituted
business income. It was explained that TDS was deducted by the payers under
sections 194-I(a) and 194-I(b) inadvertently, even though the receipts were not
in the nature of rental income. The assessee further submitted that he was
registered under GST for providing professional and business services.
The
Assessing Officer, however, observed that the assessee failed to furnish
supporting documentary evidence such as contracts, bills, or vouchers to substantiate
the claim that the receipts were business income. Consequently, the receipts
amounting to ₹34,53,100 were treated as income from house property, and after
allowing standard deduction, an addition of ₹24,17,170 was made. The
Commissioner (Appeals) sustained the major portion of the addition, except for
a small relief of ₹1,41,600.
Before
the Tribunal, it was noted that although the assessee claimed to have filed
various documents, it was unclear which documents were furnished before the
lower authorities and which were filed for the first time before the Tribunal.
On perusal of the paper book, the Tribunal observed that the documents appeared
to be crucial for proper adjudication of the issue.
Considering
the peculiar facts and in the interest of substantial justice, the Tribunal
held that the matter required fresh examination. The Tribunal remanded the
issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication, directing
that all relevant documents be considered and reasonable opportunity of hearing
be granted to the assessee.
Accordingly,
the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
Source Link- https://itat.gov.in/public/files/upload/1768375479-tWUYYS-1-TO.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is
shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers
should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not
intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and
the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content.
The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment