Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES : SMC : NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL
ORDER This appeal by the assessee is directed against order passed by the CIT(A) on 24.02.2016 in relation to the assessment year 2007-08.
The assessee has raised the following additional grounds challenging the initiation of reassessment proceedings:-
“1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in not quashing the impugned reassessment order passed by the ld. A.O. u/s 143(3)/147 and that too without assuming jurisdiction as per law and without complying with the mandatory conditions u/s 147 to 151 as envisaged under the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. That in any case and in any view of the matter, action of Ld. CIT(A) in not quashing the impugned reassessment order passed by the Ld. A.O. u/s 143(3)/147 is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case”.
The ld. AR fairly admitted that the additional grounds could not be raised before the ld. first appellate authority but the relevant material concerning the disposal of such additional grounds is available on record. Since the issue raised through the additional grounds goes to the root of the matter and is legal in nature, I admit the additional grounds raised before the tribunal.
Coming to the merits, it is seen that the assessee has also filed additional evidence, which as per the ld. AR could not be produced before the authorities below for the reasons beyond its control. Under these circumstances and without going into the merits of the case, I am of the considered opinion that the ends of justice would meet adequately if the impugned order is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A). I order accordingly and direct him to dispose of the assessee’s aforestated additional grounds and also consider the additional evidence which has been stated to be crucial for the determination of the issue on merits as well.
In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes only.
The order pronounced in the open court on 18.10.2017.