ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AGRA vs. M/S B.P. FOOD PRODUCTS PVT. LTD., GWALIOR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 94/AGR/2025Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 April 2025AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH (Accountant Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) was empowered to remand the matter back to the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment in cases where the assessment order was passed under Section 144 of the Act. The Tribunal did not find it proper to interfere with the CIT(A)'s decision, especially since the principles of natural justice were not followed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue preferred an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) who had set aside an assessment order passed under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(A) had remanded the case back to the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment after concluding that principles of natural justice were not complied with.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(Appeals) is empowered to remand the matter back to the Assessing Officer when the assessment order is passed under Section 144 of the Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 250(6),Section 263

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: 04.04.2025Pronounced: 04.04.2025

ORDER Per Sunil Kumar Singh, Judicial Member:

This appeal has been preferred by Revenue against the impugned order dated 30.12.2024 passed in Appeal no. CIT(A)-IV/KNP/10410/2014- 15 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 Year [A.Y.] 2015- 16, wherein learned CIT(A) has set aside the assessment order dated 30.09.2022 and referred the case back to the Assessing Officer for making a fresh assessment order after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee in accordance with the principles of natural justice.

2.

Revenue has preferred this appeal against the assessee on the ground that ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in setting aside the assessment order and referring the case 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 order u/s. 144 of the Act.

3.

The appellant/Revenue was represented by Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain, ld. CIT/DR. However, none responded for the assessee.

4.

We have perused the records and heard the ld. DR in attendance.

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 the first appellate authority may set aside the assessment order and is also 2 | P a g e 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 order has been passed u/s. 144 read with section 263 of the Act. We 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 order 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 appeal is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 04.04.2025.

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →