Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, M/s Deoki Developers Private Limited, failed to file a return of income despite selling an immovable property. The case was reopened under Section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, but the assessee did not file the return even after multiple opportunities. An order under Section 147 r.w.s. 144 was passed, which the assessee appealed.
Held
The Tribunal noted that additional documents were filed before the CIT(A) under Rule 46A but were not entertained. The Ld. DR could not controvert the assessee's submissions. Therefore, in the interests of justice, the Tribunal remitted the issue back to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration, providing the assessee a reasonable opportunity to be heard and present documents.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in not considering the additional documents filed by the assessee during the appellate proceedings, and whether the matter should be remanded for fresh consideration.
Sections Cited
250, 147, 148, 144, 46A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC BENCH”, PATNA
O R D E R
PER LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”) by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereafter “the Ld. CIT(A)] dated 25.09.2025, DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1081166132(1) challenging the order of the Ld. CIT(A).
M/s Deoki Development Pvt. Ltd. (Private Limited Co.) 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that as per insight portal of the income tax department, the assessee did not file return of income and has sold immovable property for Rs. 3,05,40,700/-. Accordingly, after following the due procedure for reopening the case u/s 147/148 of the Act. The case of the assessee was reopened and notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee. In response to the notice, the assessee did not file its return of income and various opportunities were also granted to the assessee on different dates but there was no compliance from the assessee side. Accordingly, order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act was passed on 27.03.2024.
Aggrieved from the above order, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). During the appellate proceedings, the assessee filed detailed written submission and documentary evidences after going through the documents the Ld. CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee.
Aggrieved from the above order, the assessee filed appeal before the ITAT.
The Ld. Counsel reiterated the submissions made before the lower authorities and submitted that during the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee could not furnish the documents. However, during the course of appellate proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee furnished the documents but the Ld. CIT(A) has not appreciated on the entire documents furnished by the assessee and decide the appeal of the assessee and requested that the matter may be remanded back to the Ld. CIT(A) for considering the relevant documents. The Ld. Counsel further submitted the additional evidence filed by the assessee was not accepted therefore, he requested that the matter may be remanded to the Ld. CIT(A).
Considering the rival submission and perusing the entire material available on record and orders of authorities below. During the course of hearing before us as the Ld. Counsel submitted that during the appellate proceeding the additional documents as per Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules was filed which were not entertained by the Ld. CIT(A) and the Ld. DR could not controvert the submissions of the Ld. Counsel. Therefore, considering the facts of the case and in the interests of justice, we are remitting this issue back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and decide the issue as per law after considering the documents filed by the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate his case with cogent documents in support of his claim and not seek unnecessary adjournments for early disposal of the case. In case of failure, no second leniency shall be granted to the assessee.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 04.02.2026