, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . !'# ! , % !& BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.816/CHNY/2018 ( )( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NON-CORPORATE CIRCLE 15, CHENNAI. V. M/S SRI BALAJI ENTERPRISES, 7, GOKUL ARCADE, 1 ST FLOOR, SARDAR PATEL ROAD, ADYAR, CHENNAI - 600 020. PAN : ABAFS 1858 H (+,/ APPELLANT) (-.+,/ RESPONDENT) +, / 0 / APPELLANT BY : SHRI B. SAGADEVAN, JCIT -.+, / 0 / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI Y. SRIDHAR, CA 1 / 2% / DATE OF HEARING : 04.04.2019 3') / 2% / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30.04.2019 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -15, CHENN AI, DATED 27.12.2017 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. 2. SHRI B. SAGADEVAN, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESEN TATIVE, SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITION OF 1.65 CRORES 2 I.T.A. NO.816/CHNY/18 ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENCE IN CLOSING STOCK. BEFORE T HE CIT(APPEALS), ACCORDING TO THE LD. D.R., THE ASSESSEE APPEARS TO HAVE CLAIMED THAT THE DIFFERENCE IN STOCK WAS DUE TO ERROR IN EN TRY WHILE FILING E- RETURN AND THE STOCK DIFFERENCE WAS FAIRLY RECONCIL ED AND EXPLAINED. THE CIT(APPEALS) AFTER OBSERVING THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT EXAMINED ALL THE RELEVANT FACTS, ACCORDING TO THE L D. D.R., DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXAMINE THE CLAIM OF THE A SSESSEE. ACCORDING TO THE LD. D.R., THE CIT(APPEALS) HAS NO POWER TO REMIT BACK THE MATTER TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR RE-EXA MINATION, THEREFORE, THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS) CANNOT STA ND IN THE EYE OF LAW. 3. WE HEARD SHRI Y. SRIDHAR, THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE ALSO. AS RIGHTLY SUBMITTED BY THE LD. D.R ., THE CIT(APPEALS) FOUND THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS N OT EXAMINED ALL THE RELEVANT FACTS WHICH WERE FOUND IN THE ASSESSME NT ORDER. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS DIRECTED BY TH E CIT(APPEALS) TO EXAMINE THE RELEVANT MATERIAL FILED BY THE ASSES SEE. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE RELEVANT MATERIAL FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE NEEDS TO BE EXAMINED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE CIT(APPEALS ) BEING THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY UNDER THE SCHEME OF INCOM E-TAX ACT, HAS NO 3 I.T.A. NO.816/CHNY/18 POWER TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER AND REMIT BACK THE MATTER TO HIS FILE. THE CIT(APPEALS) IN EXERCI SE OF HIS POWER OUGHT TO HAVE CALLED FOR REMAND REPORT AND EXAMINED THE MATTER HIMSELF. SINCE SUCH AN EXERCISE WAS NOT DONE, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(AP PEALS) CANNOT STAND IN THE EYE OF LAW. HOWEVER, THE FACT REMAINS THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS TO EXAMINE THE RELEVANT MATER IAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THE MATTER NEEDS TO GO BACK T O THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HENCE, IN EXERCISE OF THE POWER CONFERRED ON THIS TRIBUNAL, THE MATTER IS REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSE SSING OFFICER WITH A DIRECTION TO RE-EXAMINE ALL RELEVANT FACTS AND THER EAFTER DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, AFTER GIVING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 4. WITH THE ABOVE OBSERVATION, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 30 TH APRIL, 2019 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (. !'# ! ) ( . . . ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (N.R.S. GANESA N) % / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 5 /DATED, THE 30 TH APRIL, 2019. 4 I.T.A. NO.816/CHNY/18 KRI. / -267 87)2 /COPY TO: 1. +, /APPELLANT 2. -.+, /RESPONDENT 3. 1 92 () /CIT(A)-15, CHENNAI-34 4. PRINCIPAL CIT-6, CHENNAI 5. 7: -2 /DR 6. ;( < /GF.