A two-member bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in Cuttack has restored a case to the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals (CIT (A)) after finding that the CIT (A) failed to verify the correct date of filing the return.
An appeal was filed by the revenue/Income Tax Officer, against the order dated March 26, 2024, passed by the CIT (A), National Faceless Centre (NFAC), for the assessment year 2015-2016.
During the proceedings, Sanjay Kumar, representing the revenue, submitted that the assessment order dated December 30, 2017, incorrectly recorded the date of filing of the return by the assessee as November 25, 2015, whereas the actual date of filing was November 27, 2016. It was argued that the CIT(A) allowed the appeal without appreciating this correct date.
Get a Copy of Bharat’s Income Tax Act, Click here
Further submitted that the CIT(A) erroneously allowed the assessee’s appeal by holding that the notice under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act was not issued within the stipulated time period. He requested the tribunal to cancel the order of the CIT (A) and restore the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer (AO).
On the other hand, K.K. Bal, representing the assessee, admitted that the CIT (A) did not appreciate the correct facts while dismissing the appeal. He requested that the appeal be restored to the file of the CIT (A) for disposal on merits, as the CIT (A) did not adjudicate on the issues raised by the assessee regarding the addition made on merits.
The bench, consisting of George Mathan (Judicial Member) and Manish Agarwal (Accountant Member), considered the rival submissions and reviewed the material on record. It was noted that the assessee filed its return of income on November 27, 2016. Despite this, the assessment order incorrectly mentioned the date of filing as November 25, 2015. The CIT (A) allowed the appeal of the assessee based on this incorrect date without verifying the correct date of filing.
Get a Copy of Bharat’s Income Tax Act, Click here
The bench observed that the CIT(A) failed to appreciate the statement of facts filed by the assessee, where it was clearly stated that the return was filed on November 27, 2016, not November 25, 2015. The bench concluded that the CIT(A)’s action of treating the notice issued under Section 143(2) as barred by limitation was incorrect. The appeal of the revenue on this issue was allowed. However, since the CIT (A) did not decide the appeal filed by the assessee on merits, the tribunal restored the issues raised in this appeal to the file of the CIT (A) for a decision on the merits of the case
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
