KUNDLIK HARIBHAU KUDALE,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 8(2), PUNE

Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and has filed his return of income on 19.07.2017 declaring total income at Nil after claiming the deduction u/s 54B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) of Rs.1,75,00,000/-. The said return was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act.

In appeal the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, on the basis of the remand report obtained from the Assessing Officer, partly allowed the claim of the assessee wherein he determined the long term capital gain at Rs.1,70,55,949/- and allowed proportionate deduction u/s 54B of the Act at Rs.1,03,25,180/- and determined the long term capital gain at Rs.67,30,769/- for taxation.

Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the time of hearing submitted that although the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC has considered the remand report issued by the Assessing Officer, however, he has not confronted the said remand report to the assessee for which the assessee was not in a position to file his rejoinder to such remand report. He submitted that the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings has expired and his legal heir submitted certain details before the Assessing Officer which were not considered properly by the Assessing Officer. He submitted that in the interest of justice the assessee should be given an opportunity to file his rejoinder to the remand report after obtaining the copy of the remand report.

The Ld. DR on the other hand while supporting the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC submitted that a perusal of the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC shows that the assessee has not filed any rejoinder to the remand report. Therefore, he has no objection if the matter is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC.

We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. It is an admitted fact that on the basis of various details furnished by the assessee the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC called for a remand report from the Assessing Officer. However, although the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC has 6 mentioned that the copy of the remand report was provided to the assessee, however, it is the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that he has not received any such remand report for which the assessee was not in a position to submit any rejoinder to the remand report issued by the Assessing Officer. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC with a direction to provide a copy of the remand report submitted by the Assessing Officer to the assessee so as to enable him to file his rejoinder to such remand report. The Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC shall after considering the rejoinder of the assessee to such remand report, decide the issue as per fact and law. We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.

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

The concerned Pr.CIT, Pune

DR, ITAT, ‘A’ Bench, Pune 5. ग र्ड फ ईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, ////