Trinity Touch Pvt Ltd Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi)
ITAT Delhi remanded the matter back to CIT(A) since CIT(A) failed to examined the validity of jurisdiction under section 148 of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, order set aside and matter remanded back.
Facts- This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the NFAC, Delhi dated 16.03.2023 pertaining to A.Y 2012-13. The gist of the grievance of the assessee is that the assessment order passed u/s 147/143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 dated 25.12.2019 and upheld by the ld. CIT(A) is illegal, unlawful and totally contrary to the provisions of the Act and is based on invalid reopening action u/s 148 of the Act. The assessee is also aggrieved by the confirmation of addition of Rs. 1,60,00,000/- by the ld. CIT(A) which was passed without application of mind.
Conclusion- Held that the CIT(A) has not examined the facts of the case with respect to the assumption of jurisdiction u/s 148. The CIT(A) has not adjudicated on the issue of validity of reasons recorded u/s 148(2) of the Act and sanction u/s 151 of the Act of PCIT. In view of the above, we arrive at the conclusion that the ld. CIT(A) is required to examine the issues raised before him. Therefore, we set aside the impugned order to file of the ld. CIT(A) to examine the issue afresh in light of our above observations. The assessee is directed to co-operate with the first appellate authority and furnish necessary evidence as called for by the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) is directed to decide the issue afresh after allowing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
