Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed appeals against an assessment order. The CIT(A) granted partial relief but did not obtain a remand report from the assessing officer. The Revenue filed a cross-appeal regarding the valuation of Rule 46A.
Held
The Tribunal restored both the assessee's and Revenue's appeals to the file of the assessing officer for fresh adjudication, allowing the assessee liberty to file all evidences.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in granting relief without obtaining a remand report and the validity of Rule 46A valuation.
Sections Cited
254(1), 144, 46A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
These cross-appeals by assessee as well as revenue are directed against the order of ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dated 20.05.2025 for A.Y. 2022-23.
Rival submissions of both the parties have been heard and record perused.
The learned Authorised Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee submits that assessment was completed under section 144 on 20.03.2024. Against the additions made in the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before ld. CIT(A). Before ld. CIT(A), the assessee filed detailed written submission as well as various evidences. The ld. CIT(A) allowed part relief to the assessee. Though, the substantial relief was allowed to the assessee. However, the ld. CIT(A) before allowing the relief to the assessee has not obtained remand report from assessing officer on various submissions and evidences. The revenue in its cross-appeal has raised specific ground of appeal about valuation of Rule 46A. Therefore, instead of going on merit or demerit of various issues raised by assessee as well as by revenue, the matter may be restored back to the file of assessing officer. The assessee may be allowed liberty to file all evidences in support of various claims. He undertakes on behalf of assessee to be more vigilant on future in making compliance before lower authorities.
On the other hand, the learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr.
DR) for the revenue submits that there is valuation of Rule 46A by ld. CIT(A), and the revenue has raised a specific ground of appeal hence, matter may be restored to ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
4. In short rejoinder submission, the ld. AR of the assessee submits that ld. CIT(A) may require remand report on various submissions and evidences, therefore, to avoid such technical glitches in the faceless appeal manner, it would be appropriate to restore all the issues to the file of jurisdictional assessing officer.
We have considered the submissions of both the parties and considering the fairness in approach of both the ld. Representatives, we find merit in their submission that assessment was completed under section 144 and the ld. CIT(A) allowed relief to the assessee in accepting the submission of assessee on various issues without seeking remand report of assessing officer. Therefore, all the grounds of appeal raised in both the appeals are restored back to the file of assessing officer to pass the assessment order afresh. The assessee is directed to be more vigilant in future making timely compliance. Needless to direct that before passing assessment order afresh, the assessing officer shall allow fair and reasonable opportunity to the assessee. In the result, both the ground of appeals of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, both the appeals of the assessee as well as Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order was pronounced in the open Court on 04/09/2025.