HADEESH MOHAMMAD, SURAJPUR,SURAJPUR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER-1, AMBIKAPUR, AMBIKAPUR

ITA 462/RPR/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Hadeesh Mohammad, the appellant, contesting an order from the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, which was based on an assessment completed under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 due to non-compliance by the assessee. The primary contention was the refusal of the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC to accept additional evidences that the assessee wished to submit, which the assessee argued was a violation of the principles of natural justice. The Tribunal agreed with the assessee's counsel that the additional evidences should have been considered and a remand report obtained from the Assessing Officer, leading to the decision to remand the case back to the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 35658 (ITAT-RAIPUR)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961, Income Tax Rules, 1962
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S.L ANURAGI
• Assessee Lawyers: G.S. AGRAWAL
• Keywords: Additional evidence; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण Ûयायपीठ रायपुर मɅ। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.462/RPR/2024 Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Hadeesh Mohammad Village: Sonpur, P.O. Shivprasad Nagar, Dist: Surajpur-497 231 (C.G.) PAN: BGZPM7716D ........अपीलाथȸ / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Income Tax Officer-1, Ambikapur (C.G.) ……Ĥ×यथȸ / Respondent Assessee by : Shri G.S. Agrawal, CA Revenue by : Shri S.L Anuragi, CIT-DR सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख / Date of Hearing : 28.03.2025 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख / Date of Pronouncement : 28.03.2025 2 Hadeesh Mohammad Vs. ITO-1, Ambikapur ITA No.462/RPR/2024 आदेश / ORDER PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM: This appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi dated 26.08.2024 for the assessment year 2019-20 as per the grounds of appeal on record. 2. At the very outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that before the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, the assessee was not permitted to file additional evidences. It was also submitted by the Ld. Counsel that the assessment was completed by the A.O u/s.144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) and there was no compliance by the assessee. Nonetheless, the Ld. Counsel submitted that they were prevented by the genuine causes and circumstantial reasons, for which, the assessment was framed u/s.144 of the Act. It was further contented by the Ld. Counsel that for proper appreciation of facts, the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC ought to have accepted additional evidence and in terms of Rule 46A(3) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 could have obtained a remand report from the A.O. The Ld. Counsel submitted that non-accepting of the additional evidences at the threshold amounts to violation of the principles of natural justice. 3. The Ld. CIT-DR conceded the contention of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee and submitted that the matter may be decided denovo only after 3 Hadeesh Mohammad Vs. ITO-1, Ambikapur ITA No.462/RPR/2024 considering the additional evidence submitted by the assessee and accepted by the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC while complying with the principles of natural justice. 4. Having heard the parties herein and carefully considering the documents on record, we are of the considered view that as a matter of fact the adjudication done by the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC was without appreciating and admitting the additional evidences. That as per Rule 46A(3) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC can obtain a remand report from the A.O and therefore, following the mandate of the appellate jurisdiction i.e. judicious approach must be adopted and evidence/documents on record shall have to be perused and considered before arriving at a decision by any appellate authority, since this exercise was not done in the present case of the assessee, therefore, we set-aside the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC and remand the matter back to its file for denovo adjudication with a direction that the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC shall admit the additional evidences and call for remand report in terms with Rule 46A(3) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. The Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC is also directed to adjudicate the matter as per law in terms with Section 250(4) & (6) of the Act. At the same time, it is directed that this being the final opportunity, the assessee shall duly comply with the hearing notices from the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC. 4 Hadeesh Mohammad Vs. ITO-1, Ambikapur ITA No.462/RPR/2024 5. As per the aforesaid terms, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 28th March, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- ARUN KHODPIA PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) रायपुर/ RAIPUR ; Ǒदनांक / Dated : 28th March, 2025. SB, Sr. PS आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथȸ /The Appellant. 2. Ĥ×यथȸ /The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT-1, Raipur (C.G.) 4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध, आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, रायपुर बɅच, रायपुर / DR, ITAT, Raipur Bench, Raipur. 5. गाड[ फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, रायपुर / ITAT, Raipur. "