In appeal before the CIT(A) the assessee has challenged the addition on facts as well as on jurisdictional issue on reopening of assessment – CIT(A) has decided the issue on jurisdiction in favour of assessee , however he has not decided the issue on merits . On appeal by revenue the assessee has filed application and under Rule 27 of the ITAT Rules and contended that CIT (A) ought to have decided the matter on merits . Tribunal held that even if a decision is challenged before the first appellate authority both on issue of validity of jurisdiction as well as merits of the case, the adjudication on the issue of merits can by no stretch of imagination be liable for rejection on the ground that the assessment has been quashed due to change of opinion. Ref : CIT v. Ramdas Pharmacy [1970] 77 ITR 276 (Mad.) (HC). (I.T.A. No.3662/Mum/2016, dt. 02.07.2018) (A.Y. 2006-07)
DCIT v. J. M. Financial Institutional Securities Ltd.( 2018) 67 ITR 52 (SN) (Mum.) (Trib.), www.itatonline.org
S. 250 : Appeal – Commissioner (Appeals) – Procedure – All issues to be mandatorily adjudicated when specific ground is raised. Matter remanded to CIT(A) to decide all the issues raised before him afresh which were not adjudicated [ R.27 ]