Case Law Details
International Tractors Ltd. Vs DCIT (Delhi High Court)
Unless the Tribunal would have reached to a conclusion and expressed its clear view, in that respect, as to what was wrong or missing in the examination made by the CIT(A), a remand was not called for. We agree with Mr. Seth’s contention that the CIT(A) in the exercise of its powers under Section 250(4) of the Act was entitled to seek production of documents and/or material to satisfy himself as to whether or not the deductions claimed were sustainable/viable in law. This was, however, a case where the details were placed before the AO, who declined to entertain the claims only on the ground that they did not form part of assessee’s original return and that the assessee had not made a course correction by filing a revised return.
In any event, we are of the view that, if a claim is otherwise sustainable in law, then the appellate authorities are empowered to entertain the same. This view finds reflection in a judgment of the coordinate bench of this Court dated 28.11.2011, passed in ITA No.1233/2011, titled CIT vs. Aspentech India Pvt. Ltd.
In our view, the judgment of the Tribunal deserves to be set aside. The fresh claims made by the assessee, as allowed by the CIT(A), will have to be sustained. It is ordered accordingly.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER of DELHI HIGH COURT
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
