What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee produced additional evidence before the CIT(A) without it being first presented to the Assessing Officer, violating Rule 46A. Therefore, the issues were restored to the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication.

The revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order, and the assessee filed a cross-objection. The additions were made by the Assessing Officer due to the assessee's non-cooperation and failure to produce details.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in admitting additional evidence without a remand report from the AO, and whether the matter should be restored to the AO for fresh consideration.

DCIT vs Jyote Properties, Bhubaneswar | ITAT Cuttack 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kr. Sahoo, AR

For Respondent: Shri Ashim Kr. Chakraborty, CIT-DR

Hearing: 18.05.2026Pronounced: 18.05.2026

Heard together (2 matters)

C.O 09/CTK/2026

ITA No.668/CTK/2026

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.668/CTK/2025 Assessment Year: 2022-23 DCIT, Circle-2(1), Jyote Properties Bhubaneswar Vs 462, Gautam Nagar, Lewis Road, Bhunaneswar, Odisha-751002. (PAN: AAIFJ3381K) (Appellant) (Respondent)

C.O 09/CTK/2026 (in ITA No.668/CTK/2026) Assessment Year: 2022-23 Jyote Properties DCIT, Circle-2(1), Bhubaneswar 462, Gautam Nagar, Lewis Vs Road, Bhunaneswar, Odisha- 751002. (PAN: AAIFJ3381K) (Cross-objector) (Respondent)

Assessee by : Shri Sunil Kr. Sahoo, AR Revenue by : Shri Ashim Kr. Chakraborty, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 18.05.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 18.05.2026

ORDER PER BENCH:

ITA No.668/CTK/2026 & CO no.9/CTK/26 ITA No.668/CTK/2025 is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order of the NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’] in appeal no.NFAC/2021-22/10364174 dated 16.09.2025 for the assessment year 2022-23 and C.O No.9/CTK/2026 is the cross-objection filed by the assessee against the revenue’s appeal in ITA No.668/CTK/2025.

Shri Sunil Kumar Sahoo, AR represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, CIT-DR represented on behalf of the revenue.

It was submitted by the ld. CIT-DR that the additions have been made in the assessment order on account of non-cooperation of the assessee and non-production of details before the Assessing Officer. It was the submission that certain evidences have been produced before the ld. CIT(A) and the ld. CIT(A) without calling for remand report deleted the addition. It was the submission that the additional evidences may be directed to be produced before the Assessing Officer.

It was then put to the ld. AR on the evidences which have not been produced before the Assessing Officer. It was the submission that adequate opportunities have not been provided by the Assessing Officer.

We have heard the rival submissions. As it is noticed that the assessee has produced additional evidences before the ld. CIT(A) and there was violation of rule 46A in so far as these evidences have not been produced before the Assessing Officer nor has the ld. CIT(A) called for remand report from the Assessing Officer, in the interest of justice, the 2

ITA No.668/CTK/2026 & CO no.9/CTK/26 issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication.

As the cross-objection has been filed in respect of the order of the ld. CIT(A) and as we have already restored the issued to the file of the Assessing Officer for readjudication, the cross-objection of the assessee has become infructuous and the same stands rejected.

In the result, ITA No.668/CTK/2025 of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes and C.O No.9/CTK/2026 of the assessee stands dismissed.

Kolkata, the 18th May, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Rajesh Kumar] [George Mathan] लेखा सदस्य/Accountant Member न्याययक सदस्य/Judicial Member

Dated: 18.05.2026. RS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent – 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR),

//True copy// By order Assistant Registrar

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), BHUBANESWAR vs. JYOTE PROPERTIES, BHUBANESWAR

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments