SUDHA RAMANI,CHENNAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORPORATE WARD 10(3), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

The ld. AR Shri R. Venkata Raman, C.A. drew our attention the remand report dated 28.02.2020 forwarded by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to the ld. CIT(A), which is placed at page 1 of the paper book and submits that the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer examined the details furnished by the assessee, held that the assessee has duly explained the sources for investments in house property and requested the ld. CIT(A) to consider the claim of the assessee. The ld. AR vehemently argued that the ld. CIT(A) should have given relief to the assessee by considering the positive remand report of the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, instead of remanding the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer, is not justified. Thus, the ld. AR prayed to decide the issue on merits and give relief to the assessee.

The ld. DR Shri A. Sasikumar, CIT submits that the ld. CIT(A) rightly set aside the assessment order and remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment in view of the amendment brought in by way of insertion of first proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the Act and prayed to dismiss the ground raised by the assessee.

Heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. We note that the assessee explained that, the source of payments to the vendors are out of home loan sanctioned by the HDFC to an extent of ₹.50,00,000/- and payments by her husband to an extent of ₹.15,00,000/-. In support of the said contention, we find, that the assessee filed copy of sale deed dated 08.05.2009, copy of HDFC bank statement of assessee’s husband, copies of confirmation regarding disbursal of HDFC bank loan, copy of Form 16 of assessee’s husband and copy of bank statement showing proof of repayment before the ld. CIT(A) as well as during the course of remand proceedings. During the course of remand proceedings, the Assessing Officer considered the same and filed remand report before the ld. CIT(A), which is at page 1 of the paper book. On perusal of the said remand report, we note that the Assessing Officer clearly stated that the assessee has duly explained the source of investment in house property and requested the ld. CIT(A) to consider the same, but, however, the ld. CIT(A) remanded the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration.

We note that the Assessing Officer, in the remand report clearly observed that the assessee submitted various details showing the source for the investment in the house property and held the source for the said immovable property was explained, inspite of which, the ld. CIT(A), without considering the same, remanded the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for his consideration, in our opinion, is not justified. The ld. CIT(A) ought to have considered the addition on the basis of remand report of the Assessing Officer instead of remand. We find, no finding is given by the ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order that the issue require further enquiry by the Assessing Officer and in the absence of which, we find no purpose would serve by simply remanding the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer. We find no force in the argument of the ld. DR that the order of the ld. CIT(A) is correct in remanding the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer in view of the amendment brought in by way of insertion of first proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the Act. We note that the said amendment came into effect from 01.10.2024, wherein, the ld. CIT(A) has power to remand the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration in case of an assessment order passed under section 144 of the Act. However, in the present case, we find that the Assessing Officer himself has given positive remand report after verification of details, which clearly shows that there is no further enquiry required in this regard. Therefore, taking into account the remand report dated 28.02.2020, we hold that the assessee duly explained the source of investment in house property and the addition made by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order and as confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) is deleted. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.