What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not properly appreciated the assessee's submissions regarding the enhancement. Therefore, the case was set aside to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

The assessee filed a return of income, which was later selected for scrutiny. The Assessing Officer made an addition for interest paid to the bank. The CIT(A) enhanced this addition, considering interest due to the assessee from a partnership firm.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in enhancing the income without providing a proper opportunity of being heard and without appreciating the assessee's submissions.

Sunita Sharma vs DCIT | ITAT Jodhpur 2019

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JODHPUR BENCH (SMC

Before: SHRI N.K. SAINI

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kothari, CA

For Respondent: DR Assessee By Shri Amit Kothari, CA

Pronounced: 06.05.2019

per the partnership deed of the said firm, interest @ 12% on the opening

capital of Rs. 2,35,67,813/- i.e. Rs. 27,08,053/- was due to the assessee

and was assessable in assessee's hand but Assessing Officer did not

made the addition. Now the assessee is in appeal.

The Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A)

had not given proper opportunity of being heard and also had not

considered the submissions of the assessee. It was further submitted that

if there was any intention of Ld. CIT(A) to enhance the addition, the

notice should have been given to the assessee and the opportunity was

also required to be given.

In his rival submissions, the Ld. Sr. DR supported the orders of

the authorities below.

I have considered the submissions of both the parties and carefully

gone through the material available on record. In the present case, it is

noticed that the assessee furnished the submissions on the proposed

enhancement which has been incorporated by the Ld. CIT(A) in para 5

of the impugned order. It appears that the said submissions had not

been appreciated in right perspective by the Ld. CIT(A) while enhancing

the addition. I, therefore, deem it appropriate to set aside this case back

to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to be adjudicated afresh in accordance with

law after providing due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to

the assessee.

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

purposes.

(Order Pronounced in the Court on 06.05.2019)

Sd/- (N.K. SAINI) Vice President Dated : 06. 05.2019

“आर.के.” आदेशक��त�ल�पअ�े�षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 2. ��यथ�/ The Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�त/ CIT 4. आयकरआयु�त (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. �वभागीय��त�न�ध, आयकरअपील!यआ�धकरण, च$डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, Jodhpur 6. गाड'फाईल/ Guard File

आदेशानुसार/ By order सहायकपंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar

SUNITA SHARMA,JODHPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JODHPUR

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments