ITO, WARD 1, DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN vs. AHUSTOSH GUPTA, DEHRADUN
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the Ld. CIT(A) had committed a clear violation of Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, by considering documents produced by the assessee for the first time without a proper application and without confronting them to the AO. Therefore, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) was set aside.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) which had partly allowed the assessee's appeal. The Assessment Order had computed the assessee's income at Rs. 6,52,61,494/- against a returned income of Rs. 13,50,430/-, making additions of Rs. 6,39,11,064/-.
What were the issues?
Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in considering additional evidence produced by the assessee without following the prescribed procedure under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DEHRADUN BENCH, DEHRADUN
Before: Sh. Yogesh Kumar US & Sh. Manish Agarwal
:Asstt. Year : 2023-24 Income Tax Officer, Vs Ashutosh Gupta, Ward-1, 172, Kaulagarh Road, Dehradun, Uttarakhand-248001 Dehradun, Uttarakhand-248001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AGPPG0948J Assessee by: Sh. S. K. Matta, CA Revenue by: Ms. Poonam Sharma, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 11.12.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 19 .12.2025 ORDER
Per Yogesh Kumar US, Judicial Member:
The present appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short], Delhi dated 14.08.2025 pertaining to Assessment Year 2023-24.
Brief facts of the case are that, an Assessment Order came to be passed on 20.03.2025under Section 143(3) r.w Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by computing the income of the Assessee at Rs. 6,52,61,494/- as against the returned income of Rs.13,50,430/- by making additions of Rs. 6,39,11,064/-. Aggrieved by the Assessment Order dated 20.03.2025, Assessee preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 14.08.2025, partly allowed the Appeal filed by the Assessee. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), Revenue preferred the present Appeal.
The Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently submitted that the Assessee has produced fresh evidence/documents before the Ld. CIT(A) without filing an application under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, however, the Ld. CIT(A) has considered the documents produced by the Assessee for the first time before the Ld. CIT(A) and decided the Appeal in favour of the Assessee which is in violation of the conditions prescribed under Rule 46A of the Rules, thus sought for allowing the Appeal.
Per contra, the Ld. Assessee's Representative submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition on merits after convincing that the additions made by the A.O. are not sustainable, relying on the findings and the conclusion of the Ld. CIT(A) sought for dismissal of the appeal.
We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. During the first appellate proceedings, Assessee produced certain documents before the Ld. CIT(A) which have been considered by the Ld. CIT(A) without confronting those documents to the A.O. Apart from the same, the documents produced by the Assessee for the first time before the Ld. CIT(A) without their being any application filed under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. It is not the case where the Ld. CIT(A) has called the Assessee to produce the documents in exercise of power conferred under Rule 46A(4) of the Rules in order to decide the issue involved in the Appeal. On the contrary, the Assessee has voluntarily produced the documents in support of his grounds of appeal.
In such circumstances, the Ld. CIT(A) shall comply with the conditions prescribed under Rule 46 of the Rules by providingreasonable opportunity to the A.O. by confronting those documents in order to rebut those documents. Thus, we find that the Ld. CIT(A) has committed clear violation of conditions prescribed under Rule 46A of the Rules. Therefore, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the Appeal to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a liberty to the Assessee to file application under Rule 46A of the Rules along with the additional documents and if such application is filed, the Ld. CIT(A) shall decide the application and also decide the appeal in accordance with law.
Needless to say, the Assessee shall be provided with opportunity of being heard.
In the result, Appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes.
More judgments on Section 144B
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Mohammed Javed Bhati, Sikar vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, SikarITA 994/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Haresh Sharma, Ahmedabad vs ITO, Ward 5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2125/AHD/2026[2019-2020]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-2020
- Haresh Sharma, Ahmedabad vs ITO, Ward 5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2124/AHD/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Noore Manpower Services vs. Commissioner Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 2 Nov 2026
- Maa Bhawani Minrals vs. Commissioner Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 2 Nov 2026
- M/S. Nourangi Paints vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- Basant Kumar Gupta vs. Union Of INDIAPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- M/S Swapnashiyana Homes Developers Private Limited vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 2 Nov 2026
