RISHI AJAT SHATRU NATH SAHDEO,RANCHI vs. ITO WARD-2(5), RANCHI, RANCHI

PDF

ITA 127/RAN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi20 February 2026AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)1 pages

AI SummaryAllowed

Facts

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) who had remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer. The CIT(A) had restored the matter because the assessee neither appeared nor submitted documentary evidence. The assessee challenged this, claiming they had provided all details to the CIT(A).

Held

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had remanded the matter for fresh assessment as the assessee did not appear or provide evidence. While the assessee argued they had submitted details, the Tribunal decided to restore the matter to the Assessing Officer for readjudication, subject to a cost of Rs. 5,000 to be paid by the assessee. The assessee was directed to cooperate and furnish all documents.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAYHonda Show Room, Hehal Tangratoli,

For Respondent: Shri Kailash Gautam, Sr.DR

Hearing: 28/01/2026

Assessee represented by None Department represented by Shri Kailash Gautam, Sr.DR Date of hearing 28/01/2026 Date of pronouncement 20 /02/2026 O R D E R PER: BENCH 1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No. CIT(A), Ranchi/10311/2018-19 dated 21/02/2025 for the A.Y. 2016-17. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:

1. For that the learned CIT(A) failed to adjudicate on the issue of selection of case for limited scrutiny while set a siding and remanding the matter to A.O. (4572511).

2. For that non adjudication of the ground of limited scrutiny by the learned CIT(A), though the issue has been discussed a serial No. 6 of page No. 12 of the assessment order is against the law and unjustified.

3. For that the case was selected for limited scrutiny to verify increase in share capital, without proper verification and application of mind.

4. For that other grounds shall be urged at the time of hearing."

No one represented on behalf of the assessee but the revenue was represented by the ld. Sr.DR Shri Kailash Gautam.

Rishi Ajat Shatru Nath Sahdeo Vs ITO 3. It was submitted by the ld. Sr.DR that it appears from the impugned assessment order and the order of the ld. CIT(A) that the ld. CIT(A) has restored the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer on the ground that the assessee neither appeared before the Assessing Officer nor submitted any documentary evidence before him to explain its income for the purpose of framing assessment. The assessee has challenged the order of the ld. CIT(A) before this Tribunal on the ground that the assessee had submitted all the details before the ld. CIT(A) and he could have decided the appeal on the basis of the evidence filed before him. However, the ld. CIT(A) preferred to restore the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer for fresh assessment with direction to the assessee to produce all the relevant details and evidence before the Assessing Officer to substantiate his come. The ld. Sr. DR submitted that except appearing before the Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred this appeal before this Tribunal. It was a submission that at this point, it was told to the ld. Sr.DR that in the interest of justice, it is felt that the issues are to be restored to the file of Assessing Officer for readjudication. It was then submitted by the ld. Sr.DR that if the issues are being restored to the file of the Assessing Officer then exemplary cost must be levied.

We have considered the submissions. We find from perusal of the impugned order that the ld. CIT(A) has remanded the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer for passing of assessment order afresh but the assessee except to move before the Assessing Officer, filed appeal before this Tribunal and made prayer to restore the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer. Considering the facts Rishi Ajat Shatru Nath Sahdeo Vs ITO and circumstances of the case, we deem it proper to restore the matter back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication subject to cost of Rs.5,000/- to be paid by the assessee to the Jharkhand Income Tax Bar Association within 60 days from the date of issue of this order. The assessee is also directed to cooperate in the set aside proceedings before the Assessing Officer. The assessee is also directed to furnish all the documents with its possession before the Assessing Officer to substantiate its claim. It is also directed that the assessee should not seek adjournment without there being a justified reason.

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order announced in open court on 20/02/2026.