Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's twin appeals for assessment years 2017-18 and 2018-19 arose against the orders of the CIT(A)/NFAC. The appeals involved additions made by the Assessing Officer under Section 144 and Section 143(3) for unexplained investments and gross profit estimations.
Held
The Tribunal found that the additional evidence produced by the assessee for the assessment year 2018-19 was relevant and could not be rejected outright. Consequently, the appeals were restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the additional evidence produced by the assessee was relevant and could be admitted for reassessment? Whether the appeals should be restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication based on the new evidence?
Sections Cited
144, 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘G’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN
O R D E R PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M: These assessee’s twin appeals in & 392/Del/2024 for assessment years 2017-18 & 2018-19 arise against CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s as many DINs & Order Nos. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/105895161(1) & ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1059703154(1), dated 21.12.2023 & 15.01.2024, respectively, in proceedings u/s 144 & 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’, respectively. common order for the sake of convenience & brevity.
Heard both the parties. Case files perused.
It emerges during the course of hearing that the assessee’s former appeal involves the Assessing Officer’s Section 144 “Best Judgment” assessment dated 27.12.2019, inter alia, making various additions of gross profit estimation, business turnover, unexplained cash deposits etc., which stand upheld in principle in the lower appellate discussion. The factual position is hardly any different in the assessee’s latter assessment year’s appeal as well wherein unexplained investment of Rs. 3.47 crores and estimate gross profit of Rs. 47,51,145/- ; respectively, form subject matter of addition which stands affirmed in the lower appellate discussion in principle.
We have given our thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s and Revenue’s vehement submissions reiterating their respective stands. The assessee made his endeavour to explain the failure in not filing of all quantitative and qualitative details along with other supportive evidences to various communication gaps.
Coming to the latter assessment year 2018-19, he invited our attention to his additional evidence in light of Rule 29 of the I.T. Rules to rebut both the lower authorities findings alleging his failure in proving the source of these unexplained hardly dispute that the assessee’s above additional evidence indeed is very much relevant which could not be altogether rejected at the threshold. We, thus deem it appropriate in these peculiar facts to restore the assessee’s instant twin appeals to the Assessing Officer for his afresh adjudication as per law subject to a rider that it shall be the assessee’s risk and responsibility only to plead and produce the entire evidences within three effective opportunities in consequential proceedings.
Ordered accordingly.
All other issues on legality and merits are kept open at this stage.
The assessee’s twin appeals & 392/Del/2024 are allowed for statistical purposes.
A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order pronounced in open court on 15.07.2025.