SAGAR PRADEEP KESHWANT,AKOLA vs. ITO WARD-2, AKOLA, AKOLA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 174/NAG/2025Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur20 June 2025AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY (Judicial Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal observed that the Ld. Commissioner's order appeared to be based on non-application of mind and was liable to be quashed. However, considering it a human error, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the case back to the Ld. Commissioner for a fresh decision.

What were the facts?

The assessee preferred an appeal against an order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) / NFAC, Delhi, which affirmed an addition of ₹43,75,100/- made by the AO for variation of business income. The Ld. Commissioner's order was a cut-paste order from a previous assessment year.

What were the issues?

Whether the Ld. Commissioner's order affirming the addition by the AO was passed with due application of mind, and if not, whether the case should be remanded for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 147,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR “SMC” BENCH : NAGPUR

Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY

Hearing: 20.06.2025Pronounced: 20.06.2025

This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 16/01/2025 impugned herein passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi [in short, “Ld.Commissioner”] u/sec. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”) for the Assessment Year (for short, “AY”) 2018-19.

2.

In the instant case, the AO vide assessment order dated 25/09/2023 u/sec. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act has made the addition of ` 43,75,100/- on account of variation of business income. The assessee being aggrieved, challenged the said addition as well as assessment order by filling first appeal before the Ld.

2 ITA.No. 174/NAG/2025 Commissioner, who vide impugned order affirmed the aforesaid addition by dismissing the appeal of the assessee by cut-paste order passed by him pertaining to the A.Y. 2017-18 and, therefore, learned counsel for the assessee has submitted that proper direction be issued to the Ld. Commissioner for deciding the issues as involved and raised by the Assesse. Ld. DR did not refute the aforesaid factual aspect.

3.

Having heard the parties and perused the material available on record. Though, the decision of the Ld. Commissioner appears to be based on non-application of mind and therefore, the same is liable to be quashed. However, he is also human-being and, therefore, not immune from the human error and thus may be inadvertent or oversight, this particular error has been occurred, which cannot be construed as intentional or malafide. Thus, for just and proper decision of the case and substantial justice, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned order and consequently remanding the case to the file of the Ld. Commissioner for decision afresh, concerning the issues as involved in this particular assessment year. Thus, the appeal filed by the assessee, is allowed for statistical purposes.

4.

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 20.06.2025.

/- Sd/- (Narender Kumar Choudhry) Judicial Member

3 ITA.No. 174/NAG/2025 vr/- Copy to

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →