"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(SS)A No. 25/Ran/2021 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) D.C.I.T., Central Circle-1, Jamshedpur. Vs. M/s Chandra Awas Pvt. Ltd., Chandra Centre 1B, Kalimati Road, Sakchi, Jamshedpur. PAN No. AACCC 8427 C Appellant/ Revenue Respondent/ Assessee C.O. No. 06/Ran/2022 (Arising out of IT(SS)A No. 25/Ran/2021) (Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/s Chandra Awas Pvt. Ltd., Chandra Centre 1B, Kalimati Road, Sakchi, Jamshedpur. PAN No. AACCC 8427 C Vs. D.C.I.T., Central Circle, Jamshedpur. Objector/Assessee Respondent/Revenue IT(SS)A No. 26/Ran/2021 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) D.C.I.T., Central Circle-1, Jamshedpur. Vs. M/s Chandra Royal Regency Pvt. Ltd., 11, Abinash Appartment, Bose Para Road, Mohit Colony, Kolkata. PAN No. AADCC 5793 J Appellant/ Revenue Respondent/ Assessee C.O. No. 07/Ran/2022 (Arising out of IT(SS)A No. 26/Ran/2021) (Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/s Chandra Royal Regency Pvt. Ltd., 11, Abinash Appartment, Bose Para Road, Mohit Colony, Kolkata. PAN No. AADCC 5793 J Vs. D.C.I.T., Central Circle, Jamshedpur. Objector/Assessee Respondent/Revenue Assessee represented by Sri S.K. Jha, A.R. Department represented by Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT-DR Date of hearing 12/06/2025 Date of pronouncement 12/06/2025 IT(SS)A No. 25 & 26/Ran/2021 & CO 06 & 07/Ran/2022 DCIT Vs M/s Chandra Awas Pvt. Ltd. & One Anr. 2 O R D E R PER: BENCH 1. IT(SS)A 25 and 26/Ran/2021 are the appeals filed by the revenue and C.O. No. 06 & 07/Ran/2022 are the cross objections filed by the assessee. In revenue’s appeals in IT(SS)A No. 25 & 26/Ran/2021 are against the orders of the ld. CIT(A), Patna-3, Patna both dated 30/08/2021 for the A.Y. 2011-12 and 2012-13 respectively. 2. Smt. Rinku Singh, ld. CIT-DR represented on behalf of the revenue and Shri S.K. Jha, ld A.R. is represented on behalf of the assessee. 3. It was submitted by the ld. CIT-DR that there was a search on the premises of the assessee on 16/12/2016. It was a submission that the assessments came to be completed under Section 153A r.w.s. 143(3) wherein the share application money received by the assessees has been treated as unexplained investments of the assessee. It was a submission that on appeal, the ld. CIT(A) had considered the decision in the case of Kabul Chawla reported in (2016) 380 ITR 573 (Del) but had ended up deleting the addition on merit without discussion of the issue on merits. It was a submission that the order of the ld. CIT(A) is liable to be reversed. It was a further submission that in the cross objection, the assessee has only supported the order of ld. CIT(A) and therefore, the issue should not be restored to the file of ld. CIT(A). 4. In reply, the ld. AR submitted that a mistake committed by the ld. CIT(A) should not cause detriment to the assessee. It was a submission that the assessee had submitted all the details before the ld. CIT(A). The assessee had argued in regard to Kabul Chawla (supra) also before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) has IT(SS)A No. 25 & 26/Ran/2021 & CO 06 & 07/Ran/2022 DCIT Vs M/s Chandra Awas Pvt. Ltd. & One Anr. 3 discussed admittedly in regard to Kabul Chawla (supra), he has not discussed anything about the merits which has been submitted by the assessee. It was a submission that the assessee should not be held to be at fault. It was a further submission that in the cross objection, the assessee has admittedly supported the order of ld. CIT(A). It was, however, the prayer that if the failure is on the part of assessee, the issues may be restored back to the file of ld. CIT(A) for passing a proper order on merits. 5. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(A) clearly shows that the ld. CIT(A) has discussed the issues in line with the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla (supra), but deleted the addition on merit. There is no discussion by the ld. CIT(A) in respect of the merits of the case. Thus, the submissions of the assessee is on one line and the findings of the ld. CIT(A) is on a totally different line without giving any supporting arguments. This being so, in the interest of justice, the issues in this appeal are restored back to the file of ld. CIT(A) for passing a proper speaking order. In the result, the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes. As we have restored the issues back to the file of ld. CIT(A) for readjudication, the cross objections filed by the assessee stands dismissed. 6. In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes and both the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed. Order announced in open court on 12th June, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY) (GEORGE MATHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ranchi, Dated: 12/06/2025 *Ranjan IT(SS)A No. 25 & 26/Ran/2021 & CO 06 & 07/Ran/2022 DCIT Vs M/s Chandra Awas Pvt. Ltd. & One Anr. 4 Copy to: 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. CIT 4. DR By order 5. Guard File Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Ranchi "