RENJITH JACOB,THODUPUZHA V. ITO, THODUPUZHA

ITA 474/COCH/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Sri Renjith Jacob Chollamadathil against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), which pertained to the assessment year 2020-2021. The primary issue under dispute was whether the assessee was earning agricultural income. The assessee had submitted additional documentary evidences to support his claim, which were not considered by the lower authorities due to technical reasons related to the non-filing of an application under Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) should have considered the evidences and thus remanded the case back to the CIT(A) for a thorough re-examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 31302 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LEENA LAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Accountant Member & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Judicial Member ITA No.474/Coch/2024 : Asst.Year 2020-2021 Sri.Renjith Jacob Chollamadathil (Ambanappillil) House, Udumbannoor PO Thodupuzha Idukki – 685 595. PAN : AGLPJ4624L. v. The Income Tax Officer Thodupuzha. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : --- None --- Respondent by :Smt.Leena Lal, Sr.AR Date of Hearing : 20.01.2025. Date of Pronouncement : 19.02.2025 O R D E R Per Prakash Chand Yadav, JM : The present appeal of the assessee is arising from the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) dated 29th March, 2024 and relates to the assessment year 2020-2021, having DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1063609617(1). 2. At the outset the learned Counsel for the assessee has pointed out that the only issue in this appeal is to be decided is whether the assessee is earning agricultural income or not. The learned Counsel of the assessee pointed out that before the lower authorities the assessee was unable to file certain documentary evidences in support of the claim that the ITA No.474/Coch/2024. Sri.Renjith Jacob. 2 assessee is an agriculturist and was carrying out agricultural operations during the year under consideration. The Counsel for the assessee has filed certain documentary evidences before us as additional evidences, which evidences were also filed before the lower authorities. However, the lower authorities could not consider the evidences on some technical reasons. Therefore, the ld.Counsel for the assessee requested for one more opportunity before the ld.CIT(A) in order to prove his case. 3. The learned Departmental Representative relied upon the orders of the authorities below. 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We observe that the ld.CIT(A) has discarded the evidences filed before him on the ground that the assessee could not file any application under Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules along with evidences. Before us, the learned Counsel for the assessee contended that the assessee has duly explained the reasons for not filing the documentary evidences before the ld.CIT(A), by way of statements of facts. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the ld.CIT(A) ought to have examined the evidences filed before him, instead of ignoring the same on technical reasons. Hence, we restore this matter back to the file of the ld.CIT(A) for examining afresh, considering the documentary evidences filed by the assessee before him. The assessee would also place the entire material / documentary evidences before the ld.CIT(A) in the remand proceedings. ITA No.474/Coch/2024. Sri.Renjith Jacob. 3 Needless to say, the ld.CIT(A) would grant sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee before passing any order. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 19th day of February, 2025. Sd/- (Inturi Rama Rao) Sd/- (Prakash Chand Yadav) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cochin; Dated : 19th February, 2025. Devadas G* Copy to : 1. The Appellant. 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT, Cochin. 4. The DR, ITAT, Cochin. 5. Guard File. Asst.Registrar/ITAT, Cochin "