ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, AGRA vs. SANJEEV AGARWAL, AGRA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 48/AGR/2025Status: DisposedITAT Agra29 April 2025AY 2014-15Bench: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024, empowered the CIT(A) to set aside assessment orders and remand cases back to the Assessing Officer, even for assessments made under Section 144 read with Section 153A of the Act.

What were the facts?

The Revenue preferred appeals against the assessee challenging the orders of the CIT(A) who had set aside assessment orders and referred the cases back to the Assessing Officer. The CIT(A) found that the assessee was not afforded a reasonable opportunity of hearing, violating principles of natural justice.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) is empowered to remand a matter back to the Assessing Officer when the assessment order was passed under Section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, considering the amendment by Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250(6),Section 251,Section 153A,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH, AGRA

Before: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH & SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH

Hearing: 02.04.2025Pronounced: 29.04.2025

ORDER Per Sunil Kumar Singh, Judicial Member:

These appeals have been preferred by Revenue against the impugned orders dated 20.11.2024 passed in Appeal no. CIT(A)-IV/KNP/10034/2018- 19 and CIT(A)-IV/KNP/10035/2018-19 by the Ld. Commissioner of Income– tax(Appeals)-4, Kanpur [hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A)”] u/s. 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "Act"] for the Assessment Years [A.Y.] 2013-14 and 2014-15, wherein learned CIT(A) after resorting to the recent amendment inserted by Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024 w.e.f. 01.10.2024 in section 251, has set aside the assessment orders dated 28.03.2016 and 23.03.2016 and referred the cases back to the Assessing Officer for making a fresh assessment orders after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee in accordance with the principles of natural justice.

2.

Revenue has preferred these appeals against the assessee on the ground that ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in setting aside the assessment orders passed u/s. 153A/144 of the Act and referring the cases back to the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment ignoring the fact that the assessee had been provided sufficient opportunities of hearing by the Assessing Officer. Revenue has further mentioned that the failure on the part of the assessee in responding to the statutory notices without any reasonable ground has resulted in passing such assessment orders u/s. 144 of the Act.

4.

We have perused the records and heard the ld. Departmental Representative for the Revenue and ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee.

5.

The small issue involved in this appeal is as to whether ld. CIT(Appeals) is empowered to remand the matter back to the Assessing Officer in a case when the assessment order is passed u/s. 144 of the Act.

Ld. DR has not disputed that the Finance (No.2) Act, 2024 has empowered ld. CIT(Appeals) w.e.f. from the said amendment, i.e., from 01.10.2024 that 2 | P a g e the first appellate authority may set aside the assessment order and is also empowered to refer the case back to the Assessing Officer for making fresh assessment in case of an appeal against the order of assessment passed u/s. 144 of the Act. It is also not disputed that the said assessment orders have been passed u/s. 144 read with section 153A of the Act. A perusal of the impugned orders reveals that the ld. CIT(Appeals) has categorically found that the assessee was not afforded reasonable opportunity of hearing in the assessment proceedings. We, therefore, do not deem it just and proper to interfere in the wisdom of ld. CIT(Appeals) in referring the case to the Assessing Officer back when the authority has made such orders after concluding that the principles of natural justice have not been complied with.

Said issue is accordingly decided against the appellant/Revenue.

6.

In the result, Revenue’s both the appeals are dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 29.04.2025.

More judgments on Section 251

All 1,124 judgments and leading authorities on Section 251 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →