AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2020-21 arises against Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-24 (for short, “CIT(A)”), New Delhi’s order dated 22.04.2026 passed in DIN & Order No. ITBA/APL/M/250/2026-27/1088579774(1), involving proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; hereinafter referred to as, “the Act”.
Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
Learned counsel submits that on account of communication gaps at various levels, the assessee could not file his complete detailed evidence before the Assessing Officer which could only be submitted before the CIT(A) under Rule 46 of the Income Tax Rules. And that the same has been wrongly refused to be admitted even in the lower appellate discussion.
Be that as it may, the fact remains that possibility of some communication gaps at various levels in such an instance could not be altogether ruled out. And also that the assessee’s additional evidence hereinabove very much goes to the root of the matter. It is therefore deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A) for his afresh appropriate adjudication, after admission of his additional evidence, within three effective opportunities of hearing at his risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.
This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.