AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER KRINWANT SAHAY, AM:
Appeal in this case has been filed by the revenue against the order dated 05.02.2026 passed by the ld. CIT(A) NFAC, Delhi for Assessment Year: 2016-17.
During proceedings before us, the ld. DR submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition made by the AO without considering the facts that no relevant documentary evidence was filed by the assessee during assessment proceedings and mere submissions of balance sheet or general explanation does not discharge the onus u/s 68.
The ld. DR also argued that the ld. CIT(A) has accepted additional evidence filed by the assessee without seeking any remand report from the AO. Accordingly, he argued that the additions deleted by the ld. CIT(A) may be rejected.
Per contra, the ld. DR relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A).
We have considered the findings given by the authorities below and we find that the ld. CIT(A) should have given an opportunity to the AO to give his remarks/enquiry report on additional evidences filed by the assessee during the appellate proceedings which has not been done. Accordingly, we remand this back to the file of the AO for de-novo assessment after giving adequate opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to file all relevant submission sand documents before the AO in time.
In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes.