OD3 ITAT No. 174 of 2019 GA No. 2459 of 2019 IN HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE M/s. Datex Ohmeda (India) Pvt. Ltd. Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward 12(3), Kolkata & Ors. Before: Hon'ble Justice I. P. MUKERJI And Hon ble Justice PROTIK PRAKASH BANERJEE Date: 2nd March 2020 Appearance: Mr. Sachit Jolly, Advocate Mrs. Swapna Das, Advocate Mr. Siddharth Das, Advocate for appellant Mr. Dhiraj Trivedi, Advocate Ms. Abha Tiwari, Advocate for respondent Court: As issue involved in this appeal is very short, by consent of learned counsel of parties we treat this appeal as on day s list. revenue as well as assessee were aggrieved by subject order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and preferred appeals/cross objections before tribunal. tribunal by its impugned order dated 31st May 2019 observed that there was procedural violation of Rule 46A(2) and (3) of Income Tax Rules, 1962. To be more specific, according to tribunal order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was flawed for not giving opportunity to assessing officer to deal with additional evidence as provided in Rule 46A(3). For this reason, tribunal dismissed appeal/cross objection before it. proper order would have been to remand matter to Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to rehear and redetermine appeal complying with Rule 46A(2) and (3). 2 This, in our opinion, gives rise to substantial question of law. We think that it would be proper if said impugned order of tribunal is modified by directing that entire matter be remanded to Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to decide same complying with procedural formalities under Rule 46A(2) and (3) within four months of communication of this order. We order accordingly. appeal (ITAT No. 174 of 2019) and stay connected stay application (GA No. 2459 of 2019) are disposed of by above order. (I. P. MUKERJI, J.) (PROTIK PRAKASH BANERJEE, J.) R. Bose Datex Ohmeda (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer, Ward-12(3), Kolkata & Or