2023 (9) TMI 489 - HC - Income Tax

Scope and power vested upon the CIT(A) u/s 251(1)(a) - Power to remand back the case instead of adjudicating the issue himself - additions made in respect of the sundry creditors deleted - ITAT also did not consider the specific issue raised by the appellant (Assessee) - HELD THAT - Commissioner could not have remanded the matter back to the AO after having decided the case in favour of the assessee in its entirety. Mmere use of the word prima facie could not make prima facie view as CIT(A) has discussed the matter elaborately taking into the consideration the factual position. Before Tribunal, the assessee had specifically raised the ground that the CIT(A) exceeded the limits of powers statutorily bestowed as per Section 251(1)(a) and grossly erred in law in restoring the case to the assessing officer for action in terms of the order dated 23.11.2011 passed by the CIT(A). Though, such a specific ground raised by the appellant before the Tribunal and noted by the Tribunal in paragraph 3 of the impugned order, this aspect has not been dealt with by the learned Tribunal. Admittedly, the revenue had not challenged the findings rendered by the CIT(A) which was in favour of the assessee. Substantial question of law decided in favor of assessee. - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues Involved:
The judgment involves the interpretation of the powers of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) under Section 251(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in relation to remanding a matter back to the assessing officer for further verifications.

First Issue:
The first issue in this case pertains to whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had the authority to remand a matter back to the assessing officer for further verifications after agreeing with the assessee and concluding that certain additions made by the assessing officer were erroneous. The Court analyzed Section 251 of the Act, which enumerates the powers of the Commissioner of Appeals, specifically focusing on clause (a) of Section 251(1). It was noted that the power to remand the matter back to the assessing officer was omitted by the Finance Act, 2001. The Court highlighted the statutory embargo that prevented the Commissioner from remanding the matter back to the assessing officer after deciding in favor of the assessee.

Second Issue:
The second issue revolves around the contention that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) could have called for a remand report and conducted further inquiries despite using the term "prima facie" in the findings. The respondent argued that the case should be remanded back to the Commissioner for such an exercise. However, the Court observed that the use of "prima facie" did not alter the fact that the Commissioner had thoroughly discussed the case on its merits and directed the deletion of the addition made by the assessing officer. The Court also noted that the Tribunal failed to address the appellant's specific ground regarding the Commissioner's alleged exceeding of statutory powers. The Court ultimately held that the order of remand by the Commissioner was not legally sustainable and needed to be set aside, along with the Tribunal's order.

Conclusion:
In conclusion, the Court allowed the appeal, answering the substantial questions of law in favor of the assessee. The Court found errors in the Commissioner's remand order and the Tribunal's decision, emphasizing that the Commissioner's actions went beyond statutory powers and the Tribunal erred in challenging findings that favored the assessee. Therefore, the Court set aside the orders and disposed of the application accordingly.