Loading judgment…
Facts
The Revenue appealed the CIT(A)'s order deleting additions made by the Assessing Officer for AY 2020-21. The AO had made additions of Rs.99,28,101/- (including unexplained sundry creditors, liabilities, investments, and loans/advances, along with disallowance of Section 80P deduction) due to the assessee's non-compliance with show cause notices. The CIT(A) deleted these additions based on fresh evidence furnished by the assessee without obtaining a remand report from the AO. The assessee filed a cross-objection supporting the CIT(A)'s order.
Held
Both the Revenue and the assessee agreed that the matter required proper verification and examination of records. Accordingly, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanded the case back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication and verification. The assessee's cross-objection, which merely supported the CIT(A)'s order and raised no fresh issues, was dismissed.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in deleting additions based on fresh evidence without calling for a remand report from the AO, thus potentially violating principles of natural justice and Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962.
Sections Cited
142(1), 80P, 68, Rule 46A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam Bench, Visakhapatnam
Before: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Balakrishnan S.
आदेश / ORDER PER. VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT : This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 08.01.2025 of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.CIT(A)”], National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi for the assessment year 2020-21.
The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal :
1. The order of the Ld.Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, New Delhi is erroneous both in law and on facts of the case.
2. The Ld.CIT(A) erred in deleting the additions made by the Assessing Officer of Rs.99,28,101/- (other than the claim of deductions u/s 80P), since the Assessing Officer made additions based on the information furnished by the assessee at the time of assessment proceedings.
3. The Ld.CIT(A) erred in deleting the additions made by the assessing officer based on the information filed before the appeal proceedings without calling for the remand report from the Assessing Officer as per Rule 46 of Income Tax Rules, 1962.
4. Any other grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing.
3. Ld.DR has submitted that during the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (“the AO”) issued various show cause notices, but there was no compliance on behalf of the assessee, except partial compliance only to the second show cause notice issued u/s 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) dated 24.12.2021. The assessee was given the opportunity to submit complete point-wise reply with supporting documents, however, no reply was furnished by the assessee despite number of opportunities given by the AO. Consequently, the assessment was completed, whereby, the AO has made various additions and also disallowed the claim of deduction u/s 80P of the Act. The Ld.DR has submitted that before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee has furnished fresh information and evidence and by considering the said additional evidence, the Ld.CIT(A) has deleted the additions made by the AO, without even confronting the same to the AO or calling for remand report from the AO. Thus, the Ld.DR has submitted that there is violation of principles of natural justice as well as Rule 46A of Income Tax Rules, 1962. Thus, the Ld.DR has pleaded that the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) should be set aside and the matter should be remanded to the record of the AO for proper verification and examination of the record filed by the assessee as well as adjudication of the same.
4. On the other hand, the Ld.AR has submitted that the AO has made addition of the incremental loans taken, loans given by the assessee to the members of the cooperative society and further the claim of deduction u/s 80P was disallowed by the AO. He has further submitted that it is a case of poor representation before the AO and therefore, the assessee produced relevant details and evidence before the Ld.CIT(A). Ld.AR has fairly submitted that the matter may be remanded to the record of the AO for fresh adjudication.
5. Having considered the rival submissions and careful perusal of the record, at the outset, we note that the AO has made various additions on account of loans taken by the assessee, loans given to the members of the assessee cooperative society and also denied the claim of deduction u/s 80P of the Act on the ground that the assessee has not complied with various notices/show cause notice issued by the AO, calling for necessary details and supporting evidence. The relevant additions made by the AO are as under : i. Unexplained Sundry Rs.1,18,967/- Creditors ii. Unexplained other liabilities Rs.2,96,262/- iii. Unexplained investments Rs.50,49,141/- iv. Unexplained loans and Rs.44,63,731/- advances to members v. Unexplained deduction u/s Rs.74,23,565/- 80P of the Act.
It is clear that the AO has made additions of all the incremental amounts of sundry creditors, investments, loan, advances to members, other liabilities and disallowance of deduction u/s 80P.
On appeal, the Ld.CIT(A) has deleted the additions made by the AO. Now before us, both the Ld.DR as well as Ld.AR has fairly admitted that the matter requires proper verification and examination of the record. Accordingly, the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is remanded to the record of the AO for proper verification and examination of the relevant record.
In the Cross Objection, the assessee has raised the following grounds :
1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is justified in deleting the addition of Rs.99,28,101/- made by the assessing officer u/s 68 of the Act by considering the increase in certain items of the balance sheet as unexplained.
2. Any other grounds of Cross-Objection that may be raised at the time of hearing.
9. As it is clear that the assessee has not raised any fresh issue in the Cross Objection, but supported the order of the Ld.CIT(A). Accordingly, in view of our finding in the Revenue’s appeal, the cross objections filed by the assessee stands dismissed.
In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose and cross objection of the assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on conclusion of hearing on 30th April, 2025.