DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, NOIDA vs. YASHODHARA VERMA, NOIDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4903/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 September 2026AY 2016-173 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) should have sought a remand report from the AO before accepting additional evidence. Therefore, the case is remanded back to the AO for a fresh assessment.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order deleting an addition made by the AO. The Revenue argued that the assessee failed to provide documentary evidence and the CIT(A) accepted additional evidence without a remand report.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in accepting additional evidence without a remand report from the AO and whether the assessee discharged their onus under Section 68.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES ‘H’: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY

Hearing: 07.09.2026Pronounced: 10.09.2026

PER KRINWANT SAHAY, AM:

Appeal in this case has been filed by the revenue against the order dated 05.02.2026 passed by the ld. CIT(A) NFAC, Delhi for Assessment Year: 2016-17.

2.

During proceedings before us, the ld. DR submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition made by the AO without considering the facts that no relevant documentary evidence was filed by the assessee during assessment proceedings and

2 ITA No. 4903/Del/2026 Yashodhara Verma mere submissions of balance sheet or general explanation does not discharge the onus u/s 68. 3. The ld. DR also argued that the ld. CIT(A) has accepted additional evidence filed by the assessee without seeking any remand report from the AO. Accordingly, he argued that the additions deleted by the ld. CIT(A) may be rejected. 4. Per contra, the ld. DR relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A). 5. We have considered the findings given by the authorities below and we find that the ld. CIT(A) should have given an opportunity to the AO to give his remarks/enquiry report on additional evidences filed by the assessee during the appellate proceedings which has not been done. Accordingly, we remand this back to the file of the AO for de-novo assessment after giving adequate opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to file all relevant submission sand documents before the AO in time.

6.

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 10.09.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (ANUBHAV SHARMA) (KRINWANT SAHAY) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 10.09.2026 *GP/Sr.PS* Copy forwarded to:

3 ITA No. 4903/Del/2026 Yashodhara Verma 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT(E) 4. CIT 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →