AMARJEET KAUR,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, RUDRAPUR
Facts
The assessee's appeal arose from an order confirming an addition made by the AO. The CIT(A) had noted critical gaps in the assessee's documents but provided some relief. The assessee's main contention was against the surviving quantum of addition.
Held
The Tribunal found that while the CIT(A) considered some evidence, it disregarded other material. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter back to the AO for a fresh assessment, allowing the assessee to make full disclosure and submit documents.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition despite critical gaps in documentation, and whether the assessee deserves another opportunity for fresh assessment.
Sections Cited
250, 69
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “DB” DELHI
Before: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US & SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI
आदेश /O R D E R PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This appeal arises from order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”), dated 04.08.2025, passed by Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi. In this case, it is seen that while some compliance was made before the Ld. AO but the submissions made were not found to be adequate to escape the rigours of section 69 of the Act. Even the Ld. CIT(A) has recorded on pages 15 to 21 of the impugned order that there were some critical gaps in the documents provided by the assessee and has thereafter confirmed the addition after giving some relief as mentioned in para 5.4 at page 21 of the impugned order.
The assessee has approached the ITAT with grounds which challenged the surviving quantum of addition (Rs.50,07,177/-). 1
ITA NO. 191/DDN/2025 AMARJEET KAUR
Before us, the Ld. AR has stated that the assessee has good evidence in her position to establish the facts and has prayed for another opportunity before the Ld. AO for presentation of facts. The Ld. AR also pointed out that the impugned order was erroneous in its assumptions.
3.1 The Ld. DR, on the other hand, has stated that all the documents filed by the assessee were duly examined and wherever possible the Ld.CIT(A) has granted relief.
We have carefully considered the documents before us and have heard the Ld. AR/DR. We find that while the Ld. CIT(A) has duly given weightage to the evidences filed before him but thereafter as disregarded the value of certain other material that was filed by the assessee. In the interest of justice, we deem it fit to set aside the impugned order and remand this matter back to the file of Ld. AO for fresh assessment. The assessee would be accepted to make a full and correct disclosure before the Ld. AO, and submit all manner of documents in her defense. The Ld. AO would give adequate opportunity of being heard and thereafter, examine the evidence before him and arrive at an appropriate conclusion.
In the result, this appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 20.03.2026 Sd/- Sd/- (YOGESH KUMAR US) (SANJAY AWASTHI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 20.03.2026 *Kavita Arora, Sr. P.S.
ITA NO. 191/DDN/2025 AMARJEET KAUR
