MONICA SACHDEWA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD-1(4), GHAZIABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 303/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 May 2024AY 2012-13Bench: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. SUDHIR KUMAR (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that granting the assessee an opportunity to file additional evidences would not prejudice the revenue. It directed the CIT(A) to consider these evidences, pass a speaking order, and adjudicate the matter according to the Income Tax Act.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an NFAC order for AY 2012-13, stemming from an assessment under sections 144 and 147. The appellant contended that the CIT(A) had not adjudicated on the admission of additional evidences without a speaking order and sought an opportunity to submit further material.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) failed to pass a speaking order regarding the admission of additional evidences, and if the assessee should be granted an opportunity to present such evidences.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI

Before: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR & SH. SUDHIR KUMAR

Hearing: 16/05/2024Pronounced: 16/05/2024

ORDER

PER SUDHIR KUMAR, JM:

1.

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as “NFAC”] vide order dated 30.11.2023 pertaining to A.Y. 2012-13 and arises out of the assessment order dated 13.11.2019 under section 144 read with 147 of the Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’].

2.

Heard arguments by both the sides.

3.

At the outset, the Ld. AR submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has not adjudicated on the issue of admission of additional evidences filed before them without passing any speaking order. It was prayed that given an opportunity to entire material would be submitted before the Ld. CIT(A).

4.

The Ld. DR objected in principle.

5.

We find that no prejudice would be caused to the revenue if an opportunity given to the assessee to file additional evidences as deemed fit. The Ld. CIT(A) shall consider the additional evidences by passing a speaking order and adjudicate the matter as per the provisions of the I. T. Act.

6.

Decision announced in the open court in the presence of both the parties on 16.05.2024.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →