Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee appealed against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2020-2021, where the claim of earning agricultural income was disputed. The assessee had submitted documentary evidences which the CIT(A) discarded on technical grounds for not filing an application under Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules.
Held
The ITAT held that the ld.CIT(A) should have examined the evidences instead of rejecting them on technical reasons. The matter was restored to the file of the ld.CIT(A) for fresh examination of the documentary evidences, granting the assessee a fresh opportunity to present all relevant materials.
Key Issues
Whether the ld.CIT(A) was justified in discarding documentary evidence related to an agricultural income claim on technical grounds (non-filing of Rule 46A application) and if the matter should be remanded for fresh examination.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN
Before: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav
O R D E R
Per Prakash Chand Yadav, JM :
The present appeal of the assessee is arising from the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) dated 29th March, 2024 and relates to the assessment year 2020-2021, having DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1063609617(1).
At the outset the learned Counsel for the assessee has pointed out that the only issue in this appeal is to be decided is whether the assessee is earning agricultural income or not. The learned Counsel of the assessee pointed out that before the lower authorities the assessee was unable to file certain documentary evidences in support of the claim that the . Sri.Renjith Jacob. assessee is an agriculturist and was carrying out agricultural operations during the year under consideration. The Counsel for the assessee has filed certain documentary evidences before us as additional evidences, which evidences were also filed before the lower authorities. However, the lower authorities could not consider the evidences on some technical reasons. Therefore, the ld.Counsel for the assessee requested for one more opportunity before the ld.CIT(A) in order to prove his case.
The learned Departmental Representative relied upon the orders of the authorities below.
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We observe that the ld.CIT(A) has discarded the evidences filed before him on the ground that the assessee could not file any application under Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules along with evidences. Before us, the learned Counsel for the assessee contended that the assessee has duly explained the reasons for not filing the documentary evidences before the ld.CIT(A), by way of statements of facts. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the ld.CIT(A) ought to have examined the evidences filed before him, instead of ignoring the same on technical reasons. Hence, we restore this matter back to the file of the ld.CIT(A) for examining afresh, considering the documentary evidences filed by the assessee before him. The assessee would also place the entire material / documentary evidences before the ld.CIT(A) in the remand proceedings.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 19th day of February, 2025.