ASHLEY LOBO,SOCORRO vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANAJI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 453/PAN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Panaji01 June 2026AY 2019-203 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had not adjudicated the legal issues raised by the assessee. Therefore, the Tribunal restored all issues, including the legal ones, to the CIT(A) for necessary adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee challenged an addition of Rs. 14,38,286/- and the non-adjudication of legal issues by the CIT(A). The assessee requested the matter be restored to the CIT(A) for adjudication of these legal issues.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) properly adjudicated all legal issues raised by the assessee, including the validity of the assessment order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69B,Section 115BBE,Section 144,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DB BENCH, PANAJI

Before: Dr. MANISH BORAD & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE

For Appellant: Shri S.J. Kamat (Virtual)
For Respondent: Shri Jeetendra Kumar-, DR (Virtual)
Hearing: 19.05.2026

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण "डीबी" न्यायपीठ पणजी में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "DB" BENCH, PANAJI BEFORE Dr. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.453/PAN/2025 नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2019-2020 Vs Assistant Ashley Lobo, House No. 67/5, Vaddem, Socorro, Commissioner Bardez, Mapusa-403501 of Income Tax, Goa Panaji, Goa PAN-AAAAU6077E Appellant Respondent

Assessee by : Shri S.J. Kamat (Virtual) Revenue by : Shri Jeetendra Kumar- CIT, DR (Virtual) Date of hearing : 19.05.2026 Date of : 01.06.2026 pronouncement आदेश/ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The appeal at the instance of assessee is directed against the order passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) CIT(A)/National faceless Appeals Centre (NFAC) u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 dated 23.11.2025 which is arising out of the Assessment Order passed u/s.144 dated 24.03.2022.

2.

The grievance of the assessee is two fold, firstly challenging the addition of Rs. 14,38,286/- made by the Assessing Officer (AO) u/s 69B r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act

2 ITA No.453/PAN/2025

and secondly that the legal issues raised before Ld. CIT(A) has been adjudicated.

3.

At the outset Ld. Counsel for the assesse requested for restoring the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for necessary adjudication of the legal issues raised in Form No. 35 challenging the validity of the assessment order framed u/s 144 of the Act for A.Y. 2019-20.

4.

On the other hand Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) supported the order of Ld. CIT(A).

5.

We have heard rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. On going through the impugned order we note that the assessee has raised legal ground challenging the validity of assessment order. However Ld. CIT(A) has not adjudicated these legal issues. We therefore considering the prayer made by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee deem it appropriate to restore all the issues raised in the instant appeal including the legal issues challenging the validity of assessment order, to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for necessary adjudication in accordance with law. Needless to mention that proper opportunity of hearing shall be given to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take unnecessary adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

6.

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

3 ITA No.453/PAN/2025

Order pronounced on this 01st day of June, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दििांक / Dated: 01st June, 2026. Neeta Milind Digitally signed by Neeta Milind Shirsath Shirsath Date: 2026.06.18 Neeta 14:43:02 +05'30' आिेश की प्रनिललपप अग्रेपर्ि / Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. पवभागीय प्रनिनिधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, "डीबी" बेंच, पणजी/ DR, ITAT, "DB" Bench, Panaji. 5. गाडा फाइल / Guard File. आिेशािुसार / BY ORDER,

सहायक रजजस्ट्रार/Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, पणजी, ITAT,Panaji

More judgments on Section 69B

All 1,579 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →