ASSISTANTCOMMISSIONEROF INCOMETAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2),KOLKATA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN POORVA vs. M/S. ANUBANDH FINANCIAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

The appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax “ The assessee carried the matter on appeal to the Tribunal which was allowed the assessee’s appeal by the impugned order when surprisingly the Tribunal has not discussed or dealt with the correctness of the findings recorded by the appellate authority, which, was done after a detailed factual exercise. The Tribunal has stated in the impugned order that on perusal of the paper book and document three factors have been proved by the assessee. This, is wholly

It is not comprehensible whether the assessee had raised this issue before the Ld. AO as per the provision of section 124(3)(a) of the Act. Since this issue has not been adjudicated by the Ld. CIT(A) therefore, the matter needs to be remanded to the Ld. CIT(A) who shall examine the facts of the case, consider the evidence filed by the assessee and adjudicate the issue as the appeal has already been set aside to be done afresh in the Department’s appeal.

Hence, in view of the discussion made above and to sum up, since the facts have not been correctly appreciated while deciding the appeal, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is liable to be set aside as the judicial precedents laid down by the Apex Court in the case of PCIT(Central)-1 vs NRA Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd. relied upon by the Revenue in the grounds of appeal and others as cited in the preceding paras have not been considered. We, therefore, set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and remit the appeal to him to be decided afresh, who shall allow an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and also grant an opportunity of representing the case and be heard to the Ld. AO as per rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, if required, and thereby pass an order in