Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee appealed the CIT(A)'s order for Assessment Year 2017-18. The CIT(A) had remitted the case back to the Assessing Officer (AO) for a fresh assessment, rather than adjudicating the legal issues raised by the assessee. The original assessment by the AO was an ex-parte order passed under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act.
Held
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, stating that the CIT(A) has the power to remit the matter back to the AO for fresh assessment, especially when the original order was ex-parte under Section 144. The ITAT found no infirmity in the CIT(A)'s order and directed the assessee to raise all legal issues along with other issues on merits before the Assessing Officer.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) is obligated to adjudicate legal grounds raised by the assessee or can remit the case to the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment, particularly when the original assessment was an ex-parte order under Section 144 of the Act.
Sections Cited
144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, KOLKATA
O R D E R The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 21.10.2024 passed for Assessment Year 2017-18.
It was the submission of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that the ld. CIT(A) has not adjudicated the legal issue and simply remit the matter back to the file of ld. Assessing Officer since it is an ex-parte order before the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the ld. Counsel for the assessee pleaded that the matter may go back to the file of ld. CIT(A) with a direction to adjudicate the legal ground raised
by the assessee.
3. On the other hand, ld.CIT-DR submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has power to remit the issue back to the file of Assessing Officer since the order passed by the ld. Assessing Officer is u/s.144 of the Act and the assessee 2 ITANo.2591/KOL/2024 can be able to raise the same legal ground even before the ld.AO. Therefore, ld. Sr. DR pleaded to uphold the order passed by the ld. CIT(A).
4. We have considered the submissions of the parties and perused the material available on record. It is an admitted fact that the Assessing Officer has passed the assessment order u/s.144 of the Act. It is also an admitted fact that after amendment, the ld. CIT(A) is empowered to remand the matter back to the file of ld.AO to consider and pass the assessment order on merits. However, the contention of the ld. Counsel of the assessee is that the ld. CIT(A) has not adjudicated the legal ground which was raised by the assessee, therefore, he pleaded to remit the matter back to the file of ld.CIT(A). No doubt, after amendment the ld. CIT(A) has ample power to remit the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer, however, at the same time, he can also adjudicate the legal ground raised by the assessee. Even the ld. Assessing Officer is also equally empowered to address the legal ground raised by the assessee. Since the ld. CIT(A) has already set aside order passed by the ld. Assessing Officer u/s.144 of the Act directing the Assessing Officer to make fresh assessment, therefore, we do not see any infirmity in the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) and we uphold the same. Further, we direct the assessee to raise the legal issue before the Assessing Officer along with other issues on merits and at the same time, the Assessing Officer is also directed to dispose off the legal grounds raised by the assessee along with other grounds. In view of the above findings, the grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed.