INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD 2(4), PUNE, SWARGATE vs. KALPANA VITTHAL NIMHAN, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 402/PUN/2026Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 May 2026AY 2016-173 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) did not follow the procedure laid down under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules by not providing the AO an opportunity to comment on the additional evidence. Therefore, the issue was set aside to the file of the CIT(A) in the interest of justice.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed the CIT(A)'s deletion of an addition of Rs. 9,31,91,500/- made on account of Short-Term Capital Gains. The CIT(A) had admitted additional evidence without providing the AO an opportunity to examine it.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in admitting additional evidence without following the prescribed procedure and without giving the AO an opportunity to examine it.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE

Before: SHRI Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Appellant: CA Shubhada A Koppa

आदेश /ORDER

PER Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, A.M :

This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [Ld.CIT(A)], passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act) for AY 2016-17 on 08-12-2025, emanating from the Assessment Order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act, dated 25-03-2022.

2.

The Grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue are as under:

"1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 9,31,91,500/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of Short-Term Capital Gains, by holding that the assessee was merely a consenting party, despite the fact that the assessee was one of the sellers under the Joint Development Agreement (JDA). 2. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in admitting additional evidence produced by the assessee without any formal request for its admission as per the procedure

ITA No. 402/PUN/2026

and without recording reasons for such admission as per sub-rule (2) of Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. 3. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CITIA) was justified in deciding the issue in favour of the assessee without remanding the matter to the Assessing Officer for examination and comments on the additional evidence submitted by the assessee, as per Rule 46A of Income Tax Rules, 1962. 4. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, modify and/or withdraw any of the above grounds of appeal at the time of hearing or during the course of appellate proceedings.

3.

In this case admittedly, no documents were filed during the assessment proceedings. It is also observed that the Ld.CIT(A) has admitted certain documents, without providing an opportunity to the AO.

4.

The Ld.AR accepted that documents like joint development agreement, husband's income tax return and land records were not filed before the AO and were filed before the Ld.CIT(A). The Ld.AR submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) has co-terminus powers with AO and Ld.CIT(A) has verified the facts, then decided the issue. The Ld.AR also submitted that if Bench intends to set aside the order of the Ld.CIT(A), then, instead of setting aside to the Ld.CIT(A), the matter may be remanded to the AO for verification.

5.

In this case, admittedly additional evidence was filed before the Ld.CIT(A). The Ld.CIT(A) has not followed the procedure laid down under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules. The Ld.CIT(A) has not provided an opportunity to the AO. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we set aside the issue to the file of the Ld.CIT(A). Accordingly, Ground No. 2 of the Revenue is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is Allowed for Statistical Purpose. Order pronounced in the open Court on 21st May, 2026

Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे/Pune; दिन ांक/Dated : 21-05-2026 TNMM

ITA No. 402/PUN/2026

आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: अपील र्थी / The Appellant 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent 2. 3. The concerned Pr.CIT, Pune 4. DR, ITAT, ‘A’ Bench, Pune 5. ग र्ड फ ईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →