DHANKOTTI GANESAN,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NON CORPORATE WARD-10(2), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 585/CHNY/2022Status: PendingITAT Chennai25 August 2022AY 2017-182 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the additional grounds and evidence were not considered by the CIT(A). Since the documents were not produced before lower authorities, the case was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication with a direction to the assessee to substantiate its claim.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed exemption for land acquisition compensation under Section 10(37) but failed to provide supporting evidence during assessment. The Assessing Officer added the compensation to the income, and the CIT(A) confirmed this. The assessee then sought to file additional grounds and evidence before the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred by not considering the additional grounds and evidence filed by the assessee. The primary issue is the substantiation of the claim for exemption under Section 10(37).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10(37),Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM & HON’BLE SHRI SONJOY SARMA

आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 arises out of the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 21-06- 2022 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s.143(3) of the Act on 26-12-2019. 2. The grievance of the assessee is that the additional grounds and additional evidences as filed by the assessee were not considered by first appellate authority. The Ld. AR pleaded for consideration of the 2 - same by Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. Sr. DR, on the other hand, submitted that the assessee failed to prove the claim of exemption u/s 10(37). Having heard rival submissions, the appeal is disposed-off as under.

3.

The assessee received land acquisition compensation from National Highway Authority, Thiruvallur which the assessee claimed to be exempt u/s 10(37). However, the assessee did not file supporting evidences during assessment proceedings and accordingly, the compensation of Rs.6.85 Lacs was added to the income of the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the same.

4.

We find that the assessee had filed petition for admission of additional grounds of appeal

1.

as well as additional evidences before Ld. CIT(A) which have remained to be considered by Ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order. Since the documents were never produced before any of the lower authorities, we restore the assessment to the file of Ld. AO for denovo adjudication with a direction to the assessee to substantiate its claim.

5. The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 25th August, 2022.

More judgments on Section 10(37)

All 558 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10(37) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →