Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(Appeals) and sought to admit additional evidence under Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules, 1963. These evidences were not presented to the Assessing Officer or the CIT(Appeals) previously. The assessee argued that these documents were crucial for a just disposal of the appeal.
Held
The Tribunal admitted the additional evidence, set aside the order of the CIT(Appeals), and remanded the matter back to the CIT(Appeals). The CIT(Appeals) was directed to adjudicate the matter de novo, considering the additional evidence after obtaining a remand report from the Assessing Officer in compliance with Rule 46A(3) of the IT Rules, 1962.
Key Issues
The key legal issue was whether the additional evidence should be admitted at the appellate stage and if the matter should be remanded for fresh consideration by the first appellate authority.
Sections Cited
Rule 29 of ITAT Rules, 1963, Rule 46A(3) of IT Rules, 1962, Section 250(4), Section 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAIPUR BENCH “SMC”, RAIPUR
Before: SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY
आदेश / ORDER
PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM
The present appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, dated 24.09.2025 for the assessment year 2020-21 as per the grounds of appeal on record.
2. At the very outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee filed an application under Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules, 1963 praying for admission of certain additional evidences which were not filed either before the A.O nor before the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC due to unavoidable circumstances as explained in the written application filed. In this context further, a prayer has been made by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that these additional evidences may be admitted by the Tribunal to protect interest of justice. For the sake of completeness, the said application is extracted as follows:
That the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Manoj Kumar Jain Vs. ITO, TAXC No.61 of 2025, order dated 07.04.2025 had held that the ITAT has committed grave legal error in rejecting the application without considering the fact as to whether the documents filed by the assessee are required for just and proper disposal of the appeal in light of Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules.
I have also gone through the reasons recorded in the petition filed by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee as to why these evidences were not filed before the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC or before the A.O and there is no malafide conduct detected on the part of the assessee for such failure. At the same time, the Ld. Sr. DR has not brought on record any evidence/document opposing the plea of the assessee and rather, fairly conceded that in the greater interest of justice, the matter needs to be revisited by the first appellate authority considering all these additional evidences filed on record in compliance to Rule 46A(3) of the IT Rules, 1962.
Having heard the submissions of the parties herein, considering the documents on record and as per directives of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court, I am of the view that firstly, any quasi-judicial authority shall have to consider all the documents on record before arriving at a conclusion so that there is clear reasoning in the order itself which reveals that the said authority has arrived at a such conclusion through independent application of mind. Secondly, Rule 46A(3) of the IT Rules, 1962 shall be complied with so that a ground report can be obtained from the A.O regarding all these additional evidences which were filed by the assessee. Thirdly, no prejudice caused to the revenue if the matter is remanded to the file of the Ld. CIT(Appeals) for complying with Rule 46A(3) of the IT Rules, 1962 regarding the said additional evidences. In view
7 M/s. Shakti Swaroop Enterprises Vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department I set-aside the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC and remand the matter back to its file while admitting the additional evidences and having admitted the same, I direct the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC to adjudicate the matter denovo while complying with the principles of natural justice. The Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC shall in compliance to Rule 46A(3) of the IT Rules, 1962 shall call for a remand report from the A.O and pass a speaking order considering all the additional evidences/documents filed by the assessee on record in terms with Section 250(4) & (6) of the Act.
As per the above terms grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open court on 06th day of February, 2026.