TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (10) TMI 523
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he addition made by the AO basing on the additional evidence submitted by the assessee during appellate proceedings, without giving sufficient time to the assessing officer for submission of remand report, which is violation of Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made by the AO basing on the additional evidence i.e., bank account statements and written submissions stating that the assessee was a nodal agency far channelizing the funds to implementing agencies for urban infrastructure projects / schemes of the Government on the directions of state government, without having filed the documentary evidence from competent authority by the assessee. 4. The Ld.CIT(A) erred in not considering the facts that the assessee, having made bank deposits in hundreds of crores of Rupees in its various bank accounts, had not filed the return of Income, when it is mandatory obligation of the assessee to file its ITR. 5. The Ld.CIT(A) erred in allowing the appeal by directing the assessing officer to delete the complete addition, even though the assessee failed to submit confirmation from Competent Authority of Telangana ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ereinafter in short "Ld. AO"] observed that the assessee is having total deposits of Rs. 1581,02,42,296/- (Rupees One Thousand Five Hundred Eighty-One Crores, Two Lakhs Forty-two thousand and Two Hundred Ninety Six only) and TDS return payment of Rs. 63,99,271/- for the F.Y 2014-15. Since assessee has not filed return of income, Ld. AO, Ward 6(1) Hyderabad issued notice under section 148 of the Act on 30.03.2021. Subsequently, a notice under section 142(1) was issued on 08.09.2021. Thereafter on 11.11.2021 the case was transferred to ReAC from Ward - 6(1), Hyderabad. Again, the case was transferred back to Ward 2(3), Vijayawada on 02.02.2022 from ReAC. Subsequently, notice under section 142(1) of the Act dated 02.03.2022 was issued and served on the assessee. Ld. AO. Ward-6, Hyderabad also issued notice under section 133(6) of the Act to Union bank of India. In response to notice under section 142(1) of the Act assessee produced the copy of statement of Profit & Loss Account and balance sheet as on 31.03.2015 and explained in detail about the organisation. However, Ld. AO noticed that assessee could not produce the bank account details and statements. Ld. AO therefore found the sou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssing Officer failed to file the remand report. Therefore, the Ld.CIT(A) was left with no other option to decide the matter based on the material available on record. The ld.DR submitted that it was incumbent upon the Ld.CIT(A) either to ensure compliance by calling for the remand report or he should have independently conduct necessary inquiries under the provisions of Sections 250(4) to (6) of the Income Tax Act. It was submitted that even if the Assessing Officer fails to provide the remand report, the Ld.CIT(A) being vested with co-terminus powers, should have undertaken sufficient inquires and adjudicated the matter accordingly. The ld.DR requested that the matter may kindly be remanded back to the file of Assessing Officer for proper adjudication. On merits, it was argued that the Ld.CIT(A) in Paragraphs 9.2 to 9.6, has merely reproduced the submissions of the assessee without applying his mind and therefore, the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) on merit is also incorrect. 8. On the other hand, ld.AR has submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) has discharged his duties as required under the Act by calling for remand report from the Assessing Officer. It was the responsibility of the Ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y offering explanation about queries raised by the AO, then the burden shifts over the AO to deny the assertion of appellant by bringing concrete evidence on record. But the AO simply passed the order u/s 144 on not submitting banks details. Further, in the case the evidence surface after the assessment order and appellant moved with such evidence and produce before the CIT(A) which are the vital evidence and touch the roots of the case, the admissibility of such evidences cannot be denied over riding the principles of natural justice. 6.4 In the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT 1991 AIR 241, 1990 SCR Supl.(1) 340 the Hon'ble Supreme Court, while dealing with the powers of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner observed that an appellate authority has all the powers which the original authority may have in deciding the question before it subject to the restrictions or limitations, if any, prescribed by the statutory provisions. In the absence of any statutory provision, the appellate authority is vested with all the plenary powers which the subordinate authority may have in the matter. There is no good reason to justify curtailment of the power of the Appellate ....