RAMKISHAN AGRAWAL,ROURKELA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2, ROURKELA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 366/CTK/2024Status: HeardITAT Cuttack17 October 2024AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the JCIT(A) had not followed up on the non-receipt of the remand report and had disposed of the appeal prematurely. Therefore, the issues were restored to the file of the JCIT(A) for readjudication after obtaining the remand report.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed an order from the JCIT(A) who had called for a remand report from the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer failed to provide the report, and the JCIT(A) proceeded to dispose of the appeal without it. The assessee argued that the JCIT(A) should have accepted all evidence after calling for a remand report.

What were the issues?

Whether the JCIT(A) erred in disposing of the appeal without obtaining a remand report from the Assessing Officer after calling for one, and without considering all the evidence produced by the assessee.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,

Before: BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHANMANISH AGARWAL

For Appellant: Shri Binod Agarwal, Adv
For Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR
Hearing: 17/10/20Pronounced: 17/10/20

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.

2.

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

3.

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.

4.

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.

5.

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

6.

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →