What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had not dealt with the additional evidence submitted by the assessee. Therefore, the matter was restored back to the Assessing Officer for necessary factual verification.

The assessee challenged the CIT(A)'s order which affirmed the disallowance of referral fees amounting to Rs. 14,89,275/-. The assessee had also sought to submit additional evidence before the CIT(A) which was not addressed.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in not considering the additional evidence submitted by the assessee and whether the disallowance of referral fees was justified.

Ranjan Ghosh vs I.T.O., Ward-25(2) | ITAT Kolkata 2019

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC”, BENCH KOLKATA

Before: SHRI S. S. GODARA, JM

For Appellant: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Advocate

Hearing: 24/12/2019Pronounced: 31/12/2019

Appellant by : Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Jayanta Khanra, JCIT, Sr. DR सुनवाईक�तार�ख/ Date of Hearing : 24/12/2019 घोषणाक�तार�ख/Date of Pronouncement : 31/12/2019 आदेश / O R D E R This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2013-14 arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (A)-7, Kolkata dated 04.07.2019 passed in case no. 75/CIT(A)-7/Ward-25(2)/Kol/16-17, Kolkata-14/10314/2018-19 involving proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short ‘the Act’.

Heard both the parties. Case files perused.

It emerges during the course of hearing that assessee’s first substantive grievance challenges correctness of CIT(A)’s action affirming the assessment findings adding an amount of Rs. 14,89,275/- in the nature of referral fee disallowance. I notice that the assessee had filed application for additional evidence under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules 1962 seeking to place on record additional submissions regarding bank statement, list of referral fee paid through bank etc. not forming part of assessment records. Learned department representative’s report fails to dispute that the CIT(A)’s order under challenge has nowhere dealt with the same. I therefore deem it appropriate in this peculiar factual backdrop that larger interest of justice will be met in case the sole issue is Ranjan Ghosh restored back to the Assessing Officer for necessary factual verification as per law within three effective opportunities of hearing. The assessee is directed to appear before the Assessing Officer along with a copy of this remand order on or before 30.04.2020 for further consequential proceedings.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order is pronounced in the open court on 31.12.2019.

RANJAN GHOSH,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-25(2), KOLKATA

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments