ITO WARD 2(2), GURGAON vs. KUMUDANI JANGHU, GURGAON

PDF · subscribers

ITA 2405/DEL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 December 2023AY 2012-13Bench: him. 3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. We find that the assessee had furnished certain additional evidences in support of his contentions before the ld. CIT(A) . The ld. CIT(A) instead of taking an independent judicious call on the admission of those additional evidences had simply resorted to remand the entire appeals to the file of ld. AO. The law as is relevant for the years under consideration is very clear that the ld. CIT(A) does not3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT held that the CIT(A) does not have the power to set aside appeals. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, including a decision on the admission of additional evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed additional evidence before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) instead of deciding on the admission of this evidence, set aside the appeals to the AO. The revenue appealed this decision.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in setting aside the appeals to the AO when additional evidence was filed by the assessee.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH, ‘C’: NEW DELHI

For Appellant: Ms. Swati Talwar, Adv

For Respondent: Mr. Waseem Arshad, CIT(DR), Ms. Swati Talwar, Adv

Hearing: 30.11.2023Pronounced: 21.12.2023

PER M.BALAGANESH, AM: These appeals of the revenue arise against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi in DIN-ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1053947990(1) in Appeal No. CIT(A), Gurgaon-1/ 10746/2018-19 dated 26.6.2023 for the Asst Year 2011-12 and DIN- ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1053949279(1) in Appeal No. CIT(A), Gurgoan-1/ 10859/2019-20 dated 26.6.2023 for the Asst Year 2012-13.

Identical issues are involved in both these appeals, they are taken up together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience.

The only identical issue to be decided in these appeals is as to whether the ld.CIT(A) was justified in setting aside the appeals to the file of ld. AO when additional evidences were filed by the assessee before him.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. We find that the assessee had furnished certain additional evidences in support of his contentions before the ld. CIT(A) .

The ld. CIT(A) instead of taking an independent judicious call on the admission of those additional evidences had simply resorted to remand the entire appeals to the file of ld. AO. The law as is relevant for the years under consideration is very clear that the ld. CIT(A) does not have any power to set aside the appeals filed before him. Hence we deem it fit and appropriate to restore these appeals to the file of ld. CIT(A) for denovo adjudication in accordance with law. The ld. CIT(A) is also directed to take an independent judicious call with regard to the admission of additional evidences filed before him by the assessee.

Accordingly, the ground raised by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes for both the years.

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 21st December, 2023.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →