Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “ E ”, MUMBAI
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1 , Thane [in short ‘the CIT(A)’] dated 26/12/2019, for the Assessment Year 2010-11.
Shri Bhupendra Shah appearing on behalf of the assessee submits that the assessee is engaged in the business of buying, selling and development of land. The assessee filed its return of income for assessment year 2010-11 on 22/01/2011 declaring total income of Rs.11,16,950/- comprising of income from trading in land and income from proprietorship business. In scrutiny assessment proceedings the representative of the assessee appeared and furnished P&L Account, Balance Sheet and other relevant documents before the Assessing Officer. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer sought some more documents. However, due to non- communication from Authorized Representative for the assessee the desired documents could not be furnished. The Assessing Officer passed assessment order u/s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [ in short ‘the Act’] making addition of Rs.1,09,15,348/-. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 22/03/2013, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) vide impugned order allowed assessee’s appeal in part and confirmed the following additions :
(i) Unsecured loans taken : Rs. 16,62,740/- (ii) Sundry creditors : Rs. 53,32,500/- (iii) Advance received against plots. : Rs. 31,50,000/- (iv) Adhoc addition on account of low withdrawals : Rs. 50,000/- (v) Difference in profit as per P&L Account and Balance Sheet : Rs. 3,39,760/- The ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee submits that assessee has all the relevant documents available with him, however, due to reasons beyond the control of assessee, the assessee could not produce these documents in proceedings before CIT(A). The assessee had to collect copies of documents from third parties to substantiate its claim. Since, the third parties were located at far of places in the entire state it took some time for the assessee to procure the relevant documents. The ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee filed a paper book containing 196 pages. The said paper book contains some additional documents which were not placed before the Assessing Officer or the CIT(A). The ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee pointed that documents marked ‘**’ in the paper book are additional evidences. The ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee submits that if an opportunity is granted to the assessee to furnish these documents, the assessee will be able to show its bonafide and the additions confirmed by CIT(A) in respect of unsecured loans, sundry creditors, advance received against plots and discrepancy in profit can be explained.
Per contra, Ms. Richa Gulati representing the Department vehemently 3. defended the impugned order and prayed for dismissing the appeal of assessee. The ld. Departmental Representative opposed filing of fresh evidences by the assessee before the Tribunal. The ld. Departmental Representative submits that ample opportunity was provided by the Assessing Officer to furnish the documents but the assessee failed to furnish the relevant documents. Thereafter, the CIT(A) again gave sufficient time to the assessee to file documents to defend its case, however, the assessee failed to produce the documents. Even during remand proceedings, the assessee did not produce the documents, hence, no further opportunity should be given to the assessee for filing of the additional documents. The ld. Departmental Representative submits that without prejudice to her primary contention, in case the additional documents are taken on record, the Assessing Officer should be given opportunity to examine them.
We have the submissions made by rival sides and have examined orders of authorities below. It is an undenying fact that the assessee was given opportunity by the CIT(A) to file relevant documents. Even during assessment proceedings, the assessee was asked to furnish relevant documents. However, the assessee neither furnished the documents before Assessing Officer nor participated in the assessment proceedings. Now, at Second Appellate stage the assessee has filed certain documents as additional evidences in support of his claim. The contention of the ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee is that since the documents are to be obtained from third parties and were not in the possession of the assessee during assessment proceedings or remand proceedings the same could not be placed on record, it took some time for the assessee to collect the documents from various persons spread over the State. Taking into consideration entire facts, the additional evidences field by the assessee are taken on record. Since, the documents are furnished first time before the Tribunal, we deem it appropriate to restore this appeal to the file of Assessing Officer for examination of the documents and thereafter make denovo assessment, after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee, in accordance with law. The assessee is directed to appear before the Assessing Officer on service of notice and co-operate in assessment proceedings. In case the assessee failes to co-operate with the Assessing Officer, the Assessing Officer shall be at liberty to take adverse view and complete the assessment.
In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose in the terms aforesaid.