DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATNA vs. SURESH PRASAD, PATNA

At the outset, the ld. CIT DR submitted that the assessee had filed additional evidence before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) asked for the remand report from the AO. The remand report was sent to the Ld. CIT(A) but without considering the remand report, the Ld. CIT(A) passed the order by relying on the additional evidence filed by the assessee. Therefore, he pleaded to set aside the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and remand the matter back to the file of the AO.

After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that there is no dispute that the assessee filed additional evidence before the Ld. CIT(A) and Ld. CIT(A) called for the remand report but without considering the remand report the Ld. CIT(A) passed the order. Therefore, it is a fit case to set aside and remit the matter back to the file of the AO to examine the additional evidence filed by the assessee and pass speaking order after giving opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes.