What did the Tribunal hold?

The CIT(A) admitted additional evidence, obtained a remand report from the AO which was in favour of the assessee, and deleted the additions. The Tribunal found no prejudice to the Revenue.

The Assessing Officer made additions to the assessee's income due to low GP rate and sundry creditors. The assessee submitted additional evidence before the CIT(A) which was admitted and a remand report was called for.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in admitting additional evidence and deleting additions based on a favourable remand report from the AO.

ITO vs M/S Khalsa Agro Industries, Nabha | ITAT Chandigarh 2018

आदेश/Order

Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:

The present appeal has been preferred by the Revenue against the order dated 19.3.2018 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Patiala [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’].

In this appeal, the Revenue is aggrieved by the action of the CIT(A) in deleting certain additions made by the Assessing officer on account of low GP rate and on account of sundry creditors, on the basis of additional evidence submitted by the assessee during appellate proceedings.

The Assessing officer made the impugned additions on account of failure of the assessee to furnish the relevant evidence in support of its claim. Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee submitted certain additional evidences which were admitted by the Ld. CIT(A) under Rule 46A of the

ITA No. 819/Chd/2018- M/s Khaslsa Agro Industries, Nabha 2 Income Tax Rules, 1962. The Ld. CIT(A), thereafter called for remand report of the Assessing officer in respect of the evidences and detailed submissions made by the assessee during the appellate proceeding before him. The Ld. Assessing officer after considering the said additional evidences got satisfied about the claim of the assessee and accordingly submitted the remand report in favour of the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) on the basis of said remand report of the Assessing officer allowed the claim of assessee and deleted the impugned additions. Since the additional evidences submitted by the assessee have been duly confronted to the Assessing officer and the Assessing officer after considering the same has given report admitting the claim of the assessee to be correct, under the circumstances, in our view, no prejudice is caused to the Revenue. There is no merit in the appeal of the Revenue and the same is accordingly dismissed. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 13.12.2018

Sd/- Sdt/- ( बी , आर . आर . कुमार / B.R.R. KUMAR) (संजय गग� / SANJAY GARG ) लेखा सद�य/ Accountant Member �या�यक सद�य /Judicial Member

Dated : 13.12.2018 “आर.के.” आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 2. ��यथ�/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�त/ CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य आ�धकरण, च�डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाड� फाईल/ Guard File

आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar

ITO, NABHA vs. M/S KHALSA AGRO INDUSTRIES, NABHA

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments