2019 (10) TMI 196 - HC - Income Tax

Validity of the notice u/s 153A - whether the ITAT was justified in the circumstances of the case in remanding the assessment back to the CIT (Appeals) in respect of the aforesaid assessment years - HELD THAT - Since the CIT (Appeals) had already formed an opinion on the merits of the case while deciding the case in relation to the assessment year 2007- 08 and considering the fact that even according to the Tribunal there was no need to investigate into fresh facts to adjudicate on the aspect of validity of the notice under Section 153A we are of the view that the Tribunal should have decided all the issues raised in the appeals and the cross-objections raised before it on its own rather than remanding the proceedings to the CIT (Appeals). The remand to the CIT (Appeals) in the aforesaid background would entail incurring of unnecessary expenditure by the parties and also prolong the proceedings. We therefore answer the question of law in favour of the appellant and set aside the impugned order dated 02.04.2019 with a direction to the Tribunal to proceed to decide the appeals and the cross-objections filed before it on its own.

Summary

Issues:
Remand of assessment back to CIT (Appeals) by ITAT for assessment years 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 instead of deciding the appeals itself.

Analysis:
The judgment concerns a grievance raised by the appellant regarding the decision of the ITAT to remand the assessment back to the CIT (Appeals) for assessment years 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11. The ITAT allowed the assessee to raise additional grounds regarding the validity of the notice under Section 153A without the need for fresh facts and remanded the matter to the CIT (Appeals) for consideration. The appellant contended that the ITAT should have decided the appeals itself, especially since the CIT (Appeals) had already formed an opinion on the merits of the case for the assessment year 2007-08.

The key question before the court was whether the ITAT was justified in remanding the assessment back to the CIT (Appeals) for the aforementioned assessment years. The court noted that the CIT (Appeals) had already formed an opinion on the case's merits for the assessment year 2007-08, and the Tribunal acknowledged that no fresh facts needed investigation to adjudicate on the validity of the notice under Section 153A. Consequently, the court opined that the Tribunal should have decided all issues and cross-objections raised before it instead of remanding the proceedings to the CIT (Appeals).

In light of the above considerations, the court ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the impugned order and directing the Tribunal to proceed with deciding the appeals and cross-objections on its own. The appeals were restored before the Tribunal, and the rights and contentions of the parties were left open for consideration. The parties were instructed to appear before the Tribunal on a specified date for further proceedings.