Eapen George Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore)
In the case of Eapen George Vs Income Tax Officer (ITAT Bangalore), the assessee, a non-resident individual, challenged the reassessment order for the assessment year 2019-20 passed under sections 147 and 144 of the Income Tax Act. The reassessment was triggered based on information from the Insight Portal, which revealed transactions amounting to INR 1,46,37,018, leading to additions under various heads. Despite the assessee’s minimal reported income, the reassessment order included significant additions such as salary income, interest income, short-term capital gains, and unexplained investments. The assessee argued that all communications were sent to an inactive email ID and incorrect address, depriving them of a fair opportunity to respond.
The proceedings began when a notice under section 148 was issued on 29th March 2023, but the assessee did not respond, claiming they had already left India in 2019. The assessing officer proceeded with the reassessment based on the available information, including reports from the Insight Portal, without considering the assessee’s failure to receive proper notice. Despite the assessee’s objections, the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) rejected the additional evidence filed, citing the failure to adhere to the proper procedure under DRP rules. The DRP also argued that there was insufficient time to verify the additional evidence before passing its directions.
