Tribunal partially allows appeal for assessment year 2011-12, directs reassessment with evidence.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal of both the Assessee and the Revenue partly, setting aside the assessment order for the assessment year 2011-12 due to lack of opportunity for rebuttal and examination of advertisement revenues. The issues were restored to the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication denovo with directions to provide evidence to the Assessee. The Miscellaneous Petition by the Revenue was dismissed.

---

---

Issues:
Appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax for the assessment year 2011-12, related to a Stay Petition, insufficiency of facts in the assessment order, violation of natural justice, examination of advertisement revenues, restoration of issues to the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication.

Analysis:
The judgment involves a cross appeal filed by the Assessee and the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax for the assessment year 2011-12. A Miscellaneous Petition filed by the Revenue regarding a Stay Petition by the Assessee in a related matter was also considered. The appeals and the Miscellaneous Petition were inter-connected and disposed of by a common order. Both parties were represented by their respective advocates during the proceedings.

In the Assessee's appeal, it was argued that the Assessing Officer had relied on various documents and investigation reports without providing them to the Assessee for rebuttal. The Assessee raised concerns about the lack of details regarding the investigation conducted and the information gathered under section 133(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee contended that the assessment was completed without considering their submissions and without giving them an opportunity for cross-examination or rebuttal. The Assessee requested the issues to be restored to the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication.

The Standing Counsel for the Revenue acknowledged that the genuineness of the claim of advertisement revenues was not examined by the Assessing Officer. The Revenue did not object to the assessment being redone denovo. However, it was argued that since the First Appellate Authority upheld the assessment order, the Tribunal should also uphold it.

Upon considering the submissions, the Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer had not provided the Assessee with an opportunity for rebuttal and had not examined the advertisement revenues claimed. The assessment was based on presumptions without sufficient facts and violated the principle of natural justice. In the interest of natural justice, the Tribunal set aside the assessment order and restored the issues to the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication denovo. The Assessing Officer was directed to provide all collected evidence to the Assessee and call for any necessary documents for the assessment.

As a result, the appeal of both the Assessee and the Revenue was partly allowed for statistical purposes, and the Miscellaneous Petition filed by the Revenue was dismissed. The order was pronounced in an open court after the conclusion of the hearing on January 9, 2019, in Chennai.

---