IT0, VIKAS BHAWAN vs. PRADEEP AGGARWAL, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4777/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 August 2026AY 2018-193 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found the CIT(A)'s order to be arbitrary as no opportunity was given to the AO to deal with the additional documents. The order of the CIT(A) was quashed and the issue was set aside for fresh consideration.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order which deleted an addition made by the AO. The assessee had not placed sufficient evidence before the AO, but later submitted additional documents to the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition without providing the AO an opportunity to examine additional evidence submitted by the assessee and without calling for a remand report.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 143(3),Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI

Before: MS MADHUMITA ROY & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAYShri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr.

For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr
Hearing: 23/06/2026Pronounced: 19/08/2026

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No. 4777/Del/2024 (A.Y 2018-19) ITO Vs. Pradeep Aggarwal Vikas Bhawan, Delhi 1/10933, Street No. 8, Subhash Park, Shahdara 110032 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: ACDPA3507B Assessee by: Sh. A. K. Srivastava, CA Revenue by: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR

Date of Hearing 23/06/2026 Date of pronouncement 19/08/2026 O R D E R PER MADHUMITA ROY, J. M.: The instant appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order

dated 16.08.2024 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)

under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as

‘the Act’) arising out of the Assessment Order dated 22.04.2021 passed by

the Assessment Unit, Income-tax Department under Section 143(3) read

with section 144B of the Actfor Assessment Year 2018-19.

2.

It appears from the record that evidences were not duly placed before

the Ld. A.O. but assessment was finalized upon making addition. Further

the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition. Surprisingly, no enquiry was further

conducted by the Ld. CIT(A) while deleting the addition neither any Remand

2 ITA No. 4777/Del/2024 ITO VS. Pradeep Aggarwal

Report was called for from the Ld. A.O. on the additional documents so

placed before him by the Assessee upon makingnegligible to that effect.

3.

Thus, that the order impugned passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is also found

to be arbitrary, erroneous as no opportunity to the revenue particularly the

A.O. was given by the Ld. CIT(A) to deal with those documents filed by the

assessee only before him and without making any proper enquiry, the

addition was deleted. Having regard to this particular aspect of the

matter, we quash the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and set aside the issue

to the Ld. CIT(A) for consideration of the same afresh. The Ld. CIT(A) is

further directed to call for a Remand Report from the Ld. A.O. and only

upon conducting effective enquiry and also upon considering the reply to the

Remand Report to be filed by the Ld. A.O., a reasoned order is to be passed.

4.

The Revenue’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 19/08/2026. Sd/- Sd/- (KRINWANT SAHAY) (MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 19/08/2026 R. Naheed, Sr PS Copy forwarded to 1. Applicant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR:ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, New Delhi

3 ITA No. 4777/Del/2024 ITO VS. Pradeep Aggarwal

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →