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

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.