ITO, Ward-7(1), Hyderabad V. Avantika Projects , Hyderabad

ITA 199/Hyd/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Avantika Projects, where the Assessing Officer had initially made an addition of Rs.1,82,50,000 under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, citing unexplained capital introduced. The assessee later submitted additional evidences before the CIT (A) NFAC, which led to the deletion of the addition. However, the Revenue contended that the CIT (A) NFAC admitted these evidences in violation of Rule 46A(3) without allowing the Assessing Officer a chance to rebut. The Tribunal agreed with the Revenue's contention and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 128954 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-08-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Next Hearing Date: 22-08-2023
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 02-04-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Additional evidence

Judgement Text

ITA No 199 of 2023 Avantika Projects Page 3 of 4 6. The learned Counsel for the assessee, on the other hand, submitted that the learned CIT (A) NFAC after going through the details filed by the assessee deleted the addition. However, he submitted that the Assessing Officer was not given any opportunity to rebut the additional evidences filed before the learned CIT (A) NFAC. Therefore, he has no objection, if the matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer. 7. We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the AO and the learned CIT (A) NFAC and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. Admittedly, the assessee during the course of assessement proceedings did not file the requisite details for which the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.1,82,50,000/- u/s 68 of the Act being the capital introduced. We find before the learned CIT (A) NFAC, the assessee filed certain details in the form of additional evidences based on which the learned CIT (A) NFAC deleted the addition. It is the submission of the learned DR that the learned CIT (A) NFAC in complete violation of the provisions of Rule 46A(3), admitted the additional evidences and deleted the addition without giving any opportunity to the Assessing Officer to rebut the additional evidences. It is an admitted fact that the learned CIT (A) NFAC in gross violation of the provisions of Rule 46A(3) has admitted the additional evidences and deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer without giving an opportunity to the Assessing Officer to rebut the additional evidence nor has he called for a remand report from the Assessing Officer. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to give one opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case and decide the issue as per facts and law. ITA No 199 of 2023 Avantika Projects Page 4 of 4 We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the Revenue are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. 8. In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 24 th August, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- (K. NARASIMHA CHARY) JUDICIAL MEMBER (R.K. PANDA) VICE-PRESIDENT Hyderabad, dated 24 th August, 2023 Vinodan/sps Copy to: S.No Addresses 1 Income Tax Officer Ward 7(1) 8 th Floor, Signature Towers, Opp: Botanical Garden, Kondapur, Hyderabad 500084 2 M/s. Avantika Projects, C 509 Vijaya Hills, Lakdikapool, Hyderabad 3 Pr. CIT-, Hyderabad 4 DR, ITAT Hyderabad Benches 5 Guard File By Order