Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a trust engaged in kuri business, filed returns declaring 'Nil' income for assessment years 2013-2014, 2015-2016 to 2017-2018. Assessments were completed with significant additions. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A), who called for remand reports. The CIT(A) confirmed the additions, stating the assessee did not file a rejoinder to the remand report.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee claimed non-receipt of the CIT(A)'s letter calling for a rejoinder. In the interest of justice, the matter was restored to the CIT(A) to allow the assessee to file objections to the remand report and for the CIT(A) to decide the issue after hearing the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in confirming additions without proper consideration of the assessee's objections due to alleged non-receipt of the remand report calling for rejoinder.
Sections Cited
250, 147, 144B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN
Before: Shri George George K, Vice- & Shri Inturi Rama Rao
:Asst.Year 2017-2018 Thiyya Yuvajana Samajam The Income Tax Officer XLI/316, Kodungallur v. Exemption Thrissur – 680 664. Thrissur. PAN :AAATT3160C. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sri.Anil D.Nair, Advocate Respondent by : Smt.Leena Lal, Senior AR Date of Date of Hearing :14.05.2025 Pronouncement : 15.05.2025 O R D E R Per George George K, Vice-President : These appeals at the instance of assessee are directed against four separate orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre / Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter “CIT(A)”], dated 11.11.2024 and 13.11.2024, passed u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) The relevant assessment years are 2013-2014, 2015-2016 to 2017-2018.
Common issues are raised in the appeals, hence, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order. Identical “A. The order of the Appellate Authority to the extent objected hereunder is illegal, arbitrary and unauthorized. B. The Appellate Authority went wrong in confirming the additions made in spite of acknowledging the fact that the appellant had incurred considerable expenses. C. The Authority went wrong in making additions without taking judicious note of the expenses debited to the P & L and the loss of the branches debited to the P & L. The authorities below went wrong in not taking judicious note of the loss on branches debited to the P& L after having considered the income from Kuri business, money lending business as the assets of the Appellant. For these and other grounds and documents to be submitted at the time of hearing and it is humbly prayed that the Tribunal be pleased to allow the appeal.”
Brief facts of the case are as follows: The assessee is a trust. For the assessment years 2013-2014, 2015-2016 to 2017-2018, the assessee had filed returns of income declaring ‘Nil’ income. During the relevant assessment years, the assessee was engaged in kuri business. The assessments were completed for assessment years 2013-2014, 2015-2016 to 2017-2018 u/s.147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, after making addition of Rs.25,00,000 each for assessment years 2013-2014, 2015-2016 and 2016-2017. For assessment year 2017-2018, the total income was assessed by making addition of Rs.1,02,44,430.
Aggrieved by the assessments completed for assessment years 2013-2014, 2015-2016 to 2017-2018, the assessee preferred appeals before the first appellate authority. The CIT(A) called for a remand -1115/Coch/2024. Thiyya Yuvajana Samajam. report from the Assessing Officer (hereinafter “the AO”). The AO furnished his remand reports in the month of August 2024. The CIT(A) in the impugned orders has stated that he had forwarded the remand report for assessee’s comments vide his letter dated 26.09.2024 (Refer para 5.4 of the order) and since the assessee did not file rejoinder to the remand report submitted by the AO, the CIT(A) confirmed the additions made by the AO for the assessment years 2013-2014, 2015-2016 to 2017-2018.
Aggrieved by the order passed by the CIT(A), the assessee has preferred these appeals before the Tribunal. The learned AR’s limited submission is that though it is written in para 5.4 of the impugned order CIT(A), he has called for the assessee’s rejoinder to the remand report submitted by the AO. The assessee was never in receipt of the letter dated 26.09.2024 of the CIT(A). The learned AR submitted that for the aforesaid reason of non-receipt of CIT(A)’s letter calling for rejoinder, the assessee did not submit reply to the remand reports submitted by the AO. It was stated that in the interest of justice and equity the matter may be remanded to the CIT(A) so that the assessee could file rejoinder to the remand report and thereafter the CIT(A) may be directed to decide the issue taking into consideration the assessee’s objections to the remand report submitted by the AO.
The learned Departmental Representative did not have any serious objection for the matter being remanded to the files of the CIT(A).
-1115/Coch/2024. Thiyya Yuvajana Samajam.
We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. In para 5.3 of the impugned order of the CIT(A), it has been mentioned that the AO had submitted the remand report on 21.08.2024. It is further stated in para 5.4 of the CIT(A)’s order that the remand report was forwarded to the assessee for his comments vide letter dated 26.09.2024. Since the assessee did not comment on the remand report, the CIT(A) after perusing the AO’s comments, confirmed the additions made in the assessment order. In the interest of justice and equity, we are of the view that the matter needs to be restored to the files of the first appellate authority and we do so. The assessee is directed to file his objections to the remand report within a reasonable time. The CIT(A) is directed to consider the rejoinder to the remand report filed by the assessee and shall take a decision in accordance with law after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is ordered accordingly.
In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 15th day of May, 2025.