What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, following its previous order in the assessee's own case, remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. The assessee was given liberty to file supporting evidence.

The Revenue appealed an order of the CIT(A) for AY 2022-23. The assessee's representative pointed to a previous Tribunal order in the assessee's own case which had remanded the matter for de novo assessment.

What were the issues?

Whether the matter should be remanded to the AO for de novo assessment in light of a previous Tribunal order in the assessee's own case.

DCIT vs Rumana Leather Company… | ITAT Chennai 2026

Before: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Respondent: Mr. Kumar Chandan, JCIT, Mr. S. Girish Kumar, Advocate

Hearing: 10.06.2026Pronounced: 15.06.2026

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’ए’ �ायपीठ, चे�ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI �ी इंटूरी रामाराव, लेखा सद� एवं �ी एस.एस. िव�ने� रिव, �ाियक सद� के सम� । Before Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Accountant Member & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.896/Chny/2026 िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2022-23 The DCIT, Vs. Rumana Leather company, Central Circle-1(1), No.19, Flat No.1A, Block 1, Chennai. Anugraha Apartments, Nungambakkam High Road Nungambakkam, Chennai Tamil Nadu-600034. [PAN: AAAFR0941B] (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��थ�/Respondent) Department by : Mr. Kumar Chandan, JCIT Respondent by : Mr. S. Girish Kumar, Advocate Date of hearing : 10.06.2026 Date of Pronouncement 15.06.2026 : आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal filed by the revenue is directed against the order dated 11.12.2025 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai-18 for the assessment year 2022-23.

Ld. AR Mr. S. Girish Kumar, Advocate placed on record the order dated 27.05.2026 passed by this Tribunal in the assessee’s own case in ITA Nos. 3895 & 3896/Chny/2025 and submits that this Tribunal remanded the matter to the file of the AO for de novo assessment by

2 I.T.A. No.896/Chny/26

observing that the addition is to be limited to the extent of the gross profit embedded in the bogus purchases and referred to para No. 9 of the said order.

Ld. DR Mr. Kumar Chandan, JCIT reported no objection.

Considering the submissions of the ld. AR and DR and taking into account the order of this Tribunal in the assessee’s own case, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of the AO for its fresh consideration in line with the observations made by this Tribunal in the order dated 27.05.2026. The assessee is at liberty to file evidence, if any, in support of his claim. Thus, the order of the ld. CIT(A) is set aside and the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 15th June, 2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (INTURI RAMA RAO) (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 15.06.2026 MM/- आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant, 2.��थ�/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयु�/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध/DR & 5. गाड� फाईल/GF.

DCIT, NUNGAMBAKKAM vs. RUMANA LEATHER COMPANY, NUNGAMBAKKAM

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments