Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee preferred an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) confirming an addition of ₹4,86,130/- made by the AO. The addition was in respect of opening stock due to the tax auditor not filling a specific clause in Form 3CD.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) found the assessee did not provide evidence despite opportunities. The Tribunal restored the case to the CIT(A) for re-adjudication after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition without proper opportunity to the assessee, and if the case should be remanded for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
69
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘GAUHATI BENCH’, GUWAHATI
This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 20.08.2025 for the AY 2018-19.
The only issue raised by the assessee in the various grounds of appeal is against the order of ld. CIT (A) confirming the addition of ₹4,86,130/- as made by the ld. AO u/s 69 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) in respect of opening stock for the reason that the tax auditor has not filled the figure of previous year in clause 40 of Form 3CD.
At the outset, we observe from the appellate order that the ld. CIT (A) has given a finding that despite repeated opportunity to the assessee, the assessee has not filed any evidences in defense of his
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 13.03.2026.