Dismissing the appeal of the Revenue and allowing that of the assessee, the Tribunal held that the Commissioner (Appeals) had only directed the Assessing Officer to examine the supporting documents and had only allowed the claim of deduction under section 54F in principle. This was not akin to setting aside the issue or remanding the matter to the Assessing Officer. There was no violation of section 251(1)(a) and, hence, no infirmity in the order of the Commissioner (Appeals).As regards banking transactions the assessee is given one more chance to produce the dematerialised account and details of banking transactions to prove the incurrence of loss and to quantify it and matter is remanded to the Assessing Officer. AY.2012-13 to 2014-15)
ACIT v. Justice N. Kannadasan (2023)103 ITR 590/223 TTJ 331/ 223 DTR 329 (Chennai) (Trib)
S. 251 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Powers-Commissioner (Appeals) directing Assessing Officer to verify and allow claim-Not tantamount to setting aside or remanding matter to Assessing Officer-No violation-Order is up held-Other issues matter is remanded to the Assessing Officer. [S.54F, 69, 251 (1)(a)]