SRI. BALAKRISHNA SHEKAR,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(2)(1), BANGALORE

The Ld.AR submitted that against this order of Ld.AO, assessee preferred appeal before Ld.CIT(A). However Ld.CIT(A) did not consider the submissions of assessee and upheld the order passed u/s. 154. It is submitted that on merits, assessee filed additional evidences which were also not considered in respect of the suo moto addition made by the Ld.AO.

The Ld.AR submitted that due regards have not been given to the principles of natural justice by the authorities while passing the impugned orders. We have perused the submissions advanced by both sides in the light of records placed before us. 5. Admittedly, we note that no notice as per the act has been issued to assessee while making suo moto addition after passing of the assessment order. In the interest of justice, we deem it fit and proper to remand this appeal back to the Ld.AO. 6. We direct the Ld.AO to consider the suo moto addition made in the light of evidences filed by the assessee in accordance with law. 7. The Ld.AR however informed that against the original assessment order, appeal is pending before Ld.CIT(A). Instead of remanding the present appeal to Ld.CIT(A), it was submitted by both sides that present appeal may be remanded to the Ld.AO for the reason that verification in respect of the additional evidence filed by assessee qua the suo moto addition made by the Ld.AO in the order passed u/s. 154 will have to be necessarily carried out by Ld.AO himself. 8. Accordingly, we direct the Ld.AO to pass a reasoned order on merits of the suo moto addition made in the order dated Page 13/04/2016 after verifying the additional evidences filed by the assessee in respect of the same. Needless to say that proper opportunity of being heard must be granted to assessee. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 30th November, 2022.