Held, that despite specific notices issued by the Assessing Officer calling upon the assessee to prepare a true and correct return of income and file it with the Income-tax authorities according to the provisions of law, the assessee did not file any return of income. On being asked to show cause time and again, the assessee furnished only partial information to the Assessing Officer. There was totally non-co-operation and non-compliance on the part of the assessee to furnish the required details to the Assessing Officer so as to enable the Assessing Officer to determine the true and correct income of the assessee. Further, the Assessing Officer estimated the net profit at 5 per cent. on gross receipts without any basis and without consulting any records either of the assessee’s income in the earlier years or income returned by the other persons having the same type of business as the assessee. There was absolutely no effort to collect information or data by the Assessing Officer for estimating the net profits of the assessee. No enquiry was made by the Assessing Officer in this respect. The Principal Commissioner restored the matter to the Assessing Officer to frame the assessment afresh after conducting necessary enquiries and after giving opportunity to the assessee. Since it was a case of no enquiry by the Assessing Officer and even the assessee had failed to furnish the required information to the Assessing Officer for estimation of net profits, there was no reason to interfere with the revision order passed by the Principal Commissioner. (AY. 2017-18)
Subhadip Gandhi v. ITO (2023) 101 ITR 133 (Kol.)(Trib.)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Deposit of cash during demonetisation-Non-co-operation and noncompliance of assessee to furnish details to A.O.-Estimation of net profit at 5% by AO without any basis and without consulting any records-Revision is valid. [S. 44AD, 144]