RAMKISHAN AGRAWAL,ROURKELA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2, ROURKELA
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
Before: BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHANMANISH AGARWAL
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER MEMBER AND MANISH AGARWAL MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.366/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Ramkishan Ramkishan Agarwal, Agarwal, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Income Tax Officer, Ward S.D.C.C. Complex, Kachery S.D.C.C. Complex, Kachery Rourkela Road, Rourkiela. PAN/GIR No. No. (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Binod Agarwal, Adv Binod Agarwal, Adv Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR DR Date of Hearing : 17/10/20 2024 Date of Pronouncement : 17/10/20 024 O R D E R Per Bench
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld JCIT(A)-12, Mumbai under NFAC 12, Mumbai under NFAC dated 11.7.2024 in Appeal No.CIT(A), 11.7.2024 in Appeal No.CIT(A), Sambalpur/10146/2015 Sambalpur/10146/2015-16 for the assessment year 2013- -14.
Shri Binod Agarwal, Binod Agarwal, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri the assessee and Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR appeared for the revenue.
P a g e 1 | 3
ITA No.366/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2013-14
It was submitted by ld AR that the ld JCIT(A)-12, Mumbai had called for a remand report from the Assessing Officer. However, the Assessing Officer did not provide the remand report and consequently the same has been recorded by the ld JCIT(A) in para 5 & 6 of his order. It was the further submission that ld JCIT(A) having been accepted the part contention of the assessee ought to have accepted the entire evidences produced. It was the submission that the addition is liable to be deleted.
In reply, ld Sr DR submitted that the issues in this appeal may be restored to the file of ld JCIT(A) for readjudication after obtaining the remand from the Assessing Officer.
We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the order of ld JCIT(A) clearly shows that the ld JCIT(A) has called for a remand report from the Assessing Officer. It is also noticed that the ld JCIT(A) has specifically brought on record that the remand report has not been provided by the Assessing Officer. Ld JCIT(A) without doing any follow up action has proceeded to dispose of the appeal. This being so, as it is evident that the evidences have been produced before the ld JCIT(A) and ld JCIT(A) has found it fit and called for a remand report, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of ld JCIT(A)-12, Mumbai under NFAC for readjudication after obtaining the remand report from the Assessing Officer.
P a g e 2 | 3
ITA No.366/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2013-14
In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purpoises.
Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 17/10/2024.
Sd/- sd/- (Manish Agarwal) (George Mathan) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 17/10/2024 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : Ramkishan Agarwal, S.D.C.C. Complex, Kachery Road, Rourkiela 2. The Respondent: Income Tax Officer, Ward- 2, Rourkela 3. The JCIT(A)-12, Mumbai 4. Pr.CIT, Sambalpur 5. DR, ITAT, 6. Guard file. //True Copy// By order
Sr.Pvt.Secretary ITAT, Cuttack
P a g e 3 | 3
