Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (11) TMI 987 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 - Capital carried forward and the introduction of capital as income exempt u/s.10(26) - due opportunity was provided to the assessee by the AO before passing the order u/s. 144 - CIT(Appeals) was of the view that income from the State of Tripura earned by the assessee would also qualify for exemption under section 10(26 and whatever may be the brought forward capital, it will be treated at par with the regular income unless it is demonstrated by the Revenue that such income has been sourced outside of the specified area - Whether CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that the onus to prove otherwise by the AO does not hold good in the instant case since the assessee had failed to discharge his onus properly? - HELD THAT:- As far as the capital introduced in earlier years are concerned, the assessee has explained his position. Now the Department is unable to bring on record any material, which can demonstrate that such capital was introduced from an income earned outside of this specified area. The ld. 1st Appellate Authority has discussed both these issues in the concluding paragraph and after going through the last paragraph of the ld. CIT(Appeals)'s order, we do not find any error in it and accordingly we do not find any merit in the appeal of the Revenue. Jurisdiction of ACIT, Tezpur Circle - Whether CIT(Appeals) is wrong in observing that jurisdiction of the case was with the ACIT, Circle-Tezpur ? - Though with the assistance of ld. D.R., we have gone through the record carefully. The assessee has not placed on record the Notification vide which jurisdictions are being given. What we could gather from the record available before us is that there was certain classification of cases and for better management of the assessments, it was decided that cases of the assessee where income exceeded Rs. 5,00,000/- will be assessed by ACIT, Ward-Tezpur and below this monetary limit would remain with concerned ITO at Lakhimpur. The assessee is trying to demonstrate that last return available in that Notification is to be construed filed later on. He is relying upon the returned income filed in A.Y. 2007-08, which was NIL income. To our mind, it is misleading argument. The return of income ought to be considered either A.Y. 2003-04 or 2005-06, not A.Y. 2007-08. Hence, the jurisdiction over the assessee has rightly been taken by ACIT, Tezpur Circle. This finding is given on the basis of limited incomplete information and accordingly this ground of appeal is rejected.
|