" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH Before: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member And Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Accountant Member Income Tax Officer Ward-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad (Appellant) Vs Dharmendrakumar Ishwarbhai Patel 17 Highway Park Society, Sabarmati, Ahmedabad-380005 Gujarat PAN: ABXPP3547P (Respondent) Assessee Represented: Shri Prashant Srivastav, A.R. Revenue Represented: Shri Abhijit, Sr.D.R. Date of hearing : 26-03-2026 Date of pronouncement : 27-03-2026 आदेश/ORDER PER: T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal is filed by the Assessee as the against appellate order dated 25-06-2025 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (in short referred to as “CIT(A)”), arising out of the reassessment order passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Grounds of Appeal raised by the Revenue are as follows: ITA No: 1549/Ahd/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A No. 1549/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2018-19 ITO Vs.Dharmendrakumar Ishwarbhai Patel 2 1.\" Whether the learned CIT(A), NFAC, has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.1,15,00,000/- made u/s.69A of the Income tax Act being unexplained investment without appreciating the fact that the assessee could not offer any explanations regarding the source of investment made in the two properties, which remained unexplained?\" 2. \"Whether the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in admitting the additional evidences during appellate proceedings without remanding the matter to the Assessing Officer?\" 3.\" The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or add a new ground, which may be necessary.\" 4.\" It is, therefore, prayed that the order of Ld. CIT(A) may be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored?\" 3. Brief facts of the case is that the assessee is an individual has not filed his Return of Income for the Asst. Year 2018-19. The assessment was reopened based on the information available with the department that the assessee has undertaken immovable property transactions to the tune of Rs.18.88 crores. During the reassessment proceedings, the assessee submitted that he is a co- owner in two immovable properties purchased by him, thereby the assessing officer concluded the investment made in immovable properties by the assessee during the year works out to Rs.1.15 crores and demanded tax thereon. 4. Aggrieved against the same, assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) wherein he produced the Rectification Deed reducing his share in the immovable properties from 25% to 17% relating to Survey No. 110, Amiyapur, Gandhinagar and his investment cost is Rs.47,60,000/- and similarly another property at Chandkheda, Sabarmati wherein his share of income is 5% and his investment cost is Rs.55,55,556/-. Based on the above information, Ld. CIT(A) granted partial relief to the assessee. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A No. 1549/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2018-19 ITO Vs.Dharmendrakumar Ishwarbhai Patel 3 5. Aggrieved against the same, Revenue is in appeal before us that Ld. CIT(A) erred in admitting additional evidences without calling for a Remand Report from the assessing officer. 6. Ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee fairly submitted that during the course of reassessment proceedings, the Rectification Deed was not available, so that it was not produced before the Ld.A.O. However the assessee has no objection in producing all these documents before the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to pass orders on merits of the case. 7. Recording the submissions of rival parties and in the interest of justice, we deem it fit to set-aside the orders passed by Lower Authorities and remit the matter back to the file of Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to pass fresh reassessment order after taking into account all necessary documents produced by the assessee. Needless to say the assessee should make use of this final opportunity and produce all relevant materials and documents before the JAO for passing reassessment order. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is treated as allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 27 -03-2026 Sd/- Sd/- (NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA) (T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER True Copy JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad : Dated 27/03/2026 आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A No. 1549/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2018-19 ITO Vs.Dharmendrakumar Ishwarbhai Patel 4 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से, उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, अहमदाबाद Printed from counselvise.com "