DWARKADAS BHAGVANBHAI KASWALA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE WARD-3(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1031/AHD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 November 2024AY 2018-19Bench: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR (Vice President)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal found that the CIT(A) erred in not accepting relevant evidence that had a material impact on the adjudication. Therefore, the matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for a fresh consideration of all evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee's returned income was Rs. 11,31,880, but the Assessing Officer determined total income at Rs. 35,99,610 due to capital gains. The CIT(A) confirmed the addition, disallowing a claim under Section 54F and refusing to accept evidence not produced before the Assessing Officer.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in not admitting additional evidence under Rule 46A and in dismissing the appeal without affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 54F,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-

For Appellant: Shri Mehul R. Patel, Advocate
For Respondent: Ms. Neeju Gupta, Sr DR
Hearing: 26.11.2024Pronounced: 29.11.2024

O R D E R This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "CIT(A)" for short), dated 29.04.2024 passed under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short], for Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19.

2.

The Assessee has taken following ground of appeal:- “That on facts and in law the learned NFAC- CIT (A) has grievously erred in not admitting the additional evidence in terms of Rule 46A of the IT Rules, and in not affording sufficient and reasonable opportunity hearing and in dismissing the appeal.”

3. In this case, the assessment order has been passed by the Income- tax Officer, National e-Assessment Centre, Delhi on 04.03.2021 determining total income of Rs.35,99,610/- against the returned income of Rs.11,31,880/- on account of capital gains earned. The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition and held that the assessee is not eligible for deduction as claimed u/s 54F and refused to accept the evidences which goes to the root cause of adjudication of the issue on the ground that the assessee has failed to produce the same before the Assessing Officer. We find that ld. CIT(A) erred in not accepting the relevant evidences which has material impact on the adjudication. Hence, the matter is remanded to the ld. CIT(A) to consider all the evidences and pass an order de novo.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

The order is pronounced in the open Court on 29.11.2024

More judgments on Section 54F

All 2,628 judgments and leading authorities on Section 54F →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →