ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BELAGAVI, BELAGAVI vs. M/S POTDAR BROTHERS, BELAGAVI

ITA 177/PAN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Panaji18 November 2025AY 2020-21Bench: SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE (Judicial Member), SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI (Accountant Member)16 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in admitting additional evidence without following Rule 46A of the IT Rules and without giving the AO an opportunity to examine it. The Tribunal found the impugned adjudications to be devoid of evidence and lacking merit.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s decision to delete additions made on account of alleged cashback from payments to karigars. The addition was based on search and seizure action and statements recorded from karigars and partners.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in admitting additional evidence without proper procedure and whether the addition made by the AO was sustainable without proper cross-examination and documentary evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 132,Section 133A,Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 148,Section 250,Section 251

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(4)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PANAJI BENCH, GOA

Before: HON’BLE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE & SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]
For Respondent: Mr M Satish [‘Ld. DR’]
Pronounced: 18/11/2025

PER BENCH(3:2); This bunch of five appeals instituted u/s 253(2) of the Act by the appellant Revenue impugns separate orders all dt. 03/03/2025

passed u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’ hereinafter]

ITAT-Panaji M/s Potdar Brothers ITA Nos.175 to 177 & 179 to 180/PAN/2025 by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals-2, Panaji Goa [‘Ld. CIT(A)’ hereinafter] which in turn correspondingly arisen out of separate orders of assessment passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act by captioned assessing officer [‘Ld. AO’ hereinafter] all dt.

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 132

All 14,598 judgments and leading authorities on Section 132 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →