Loading judgment…
Facts
Three appeals were filed by the assessee challenging orders passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. For AY 2015-16, the Assessing Officer (AO) had already granted the relief sought, rendering the appeal infructuous. For AY 2016-17 and 2017-18, the CIT(A) had set aside the matter back to the AO for fresh assessment.
Held
For AY 2015-16, the appeal was dismissed as infructuous. For AY 2016-17, liberty was granted to the assessee to raise all grounds, including legal grounds, before the AO during the fresh assessment proceedings. For AY 2017-18, the decision for AY 2016-17 was applied mutatis mutandis, and the grounds were allowed for statistical purposes.
Key Issues
Whether the appeals are infructuous or require fresh assessment and whether liberty should be granted to raise legal grounds before the AO.
Sections Cited
250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SURAT BENCH, SURAT
Before: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN & SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER to 271/SRT/2025 Assessment Years: 2015-16 to 2017-18 Jaysukhbhaai Gobarbhai NFAC, Delhi Savalia Vs (current jurisdiction Income Tax Officer, 32, Balaji Society, Balaji Ward – 3(3)(1), Surat, Niwas, L.H. Road, Aaykar Bhawan, Anvil Varachha, Surat–395 006 Business Center, PAN – ANDPS 7989 J Adajan, Surat-395 007 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shree Rasesh Shah, CAR Revenue by Shri Mukesh Jain, CIT. DR Date of Hearing 07.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement 09.10.2025 ORDER Per: SHRI. SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M.:
These three appeals have been filed by the assessee challenging the separate impugned orders all dated 16.12.2024 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) for the assessment years 2015-16 to 2017-18. With the consent of both parties, all the appeals were clubbed, heard together and a common order is passed for the sake of convenience and brevity.
(AYs: 15-16 to 17-18) Jaysukbhai G Savalia 2. First we take up for AY 2015- 16. At the very outset, we notice that AO has already given relief sought for by the assessee while passing the assessment order dated 29.05.2023. In view of this fact, the appeal filed by the assessee has become infructuous. Therefore, the same stands dismissed at this stage.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed as infructuous.
Now coming to assessee’s appeal bearing for AY2016-17. At the outset, we notice that Ld. CIT(A) had already set aside the matter back to the file of AO with a direction to make fresh assessment after considering all the facts of the case. At this stage, Ld. AR for the assessee has pressed legal ground and submitted that liberty be accorded to the assessee to raise this legal ground before the AO also. Keeping in view the request of Ld. AR and after hearing both the parties, we are of the view that since the matter has already been set aside to the file of AO to make fresh assessment. Therefore, liberty is granted to the assessee to raise any other grounds including legal ground before the AO and in case any legal ground is raised before the AO, then in the eventuality AO is directed to adjudicate the same on merits. Needless to mention after allowing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee during set aside proceedings. It is, ordered accordingly.
AY 2017-18. As the facts and circumstances in these appeals are identical to for AY 2016-17 (except variance in figures) therefore the decision in would apply mutatis mutandis in this appeal also. Accordingly, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
7. In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.