JCIT, NOIDA vs. M/S. PEARLS EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTE, GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1469/DEL/2013Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 September 2015AY 2009-103 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restored the matter to the AO. The AO was directed to decide the issue afresh after providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition of Rs. 45 lakh by treating it as non-application of income. The CIT(A) deleted this addition after entertaining additional evidence without confronting it to the AO.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred by entertaining additional evidence without confronting it to the AO, thereby violating principles of natural justice.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES : F : NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL, AM & MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM

For Appellant: Shri D.C. Agrawal, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Kedia, Sr. DR
Pronounced: 30.09.2015

ORDER

PER R.S. SYAL, AM:

1.

This appeal by the Revenue arises out of the order dated 7.12.2012 passed by the CIT (A) in relation to the assessment year 2009-10.

2.

The Revenue is aggrieved against the deletion of addition of Rs.45 lac by the ld. CIT(A) who held that donation made by the assessee to sister concern was genuine, without affording an opportunity to the AO for examination of the material entertained by him in contravention of Rule 46A.

3.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record. Shorn of unnecessary details, it is observed that the AO made addition of Rs.45 lac by treating this amount as non- application of income. The ld. CIT(A) entertained additional evidence and without confronting the same to the AO, deleted the addition.

Without going into the merits of the case, we are of the considered opinion that the ends of justice would meet adequately if the impugned order is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of AO. We order accordingly and direct him to decide this issue afresh as per law, after allowing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

Needless to say, the assessee will be at liberty to lead any evidence in such fresh proceedings.

4.

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

The order pronounced in the open court on 30.09.2015.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →