INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-28(5), DELHI vs. RAJENDER, DELHI

Against this order, assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and filed additional evidence in support of the claim alongwith the appeal memo. The ld. CIT(A) send all these evidences to the AO and asked to furnish remand report but the AO failed to submit any report. Thus the ld. CIT(A) after admitting the additional evidences so filed by the assessee, consider the same on merits and deleted the additions made towards the unsecured loan to M/s Nitco Technology and time deposit and confirmed the addition towards the interest income on FDR.

Aggrieved by the said order of the ld. CIT(A), the revenue filed present appeal before the Tribunal wherein following grounds of appeal are taken by the revenue: 1. “That on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) has erred in admitting additional evidence even though the assessee did not file any submission during the assessment proceedings.

After considering the reasons stated by the AO in the delay condonation petition filed, we find there was sufficient and reasonable cause with the AO in filing the appeal delayed. Accordingly, we condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication.

Before us, ld. Sr. DR submitted that the assessee has not participated in the assessment proceedings despite of various opportunities provided by the AO which is apparent from the assessment order. He further submitted that ld. CIT(A) admitted the additional evidences filed by the assessee without providing adequate opportunity to the AO to verify the same and submit the remand report to ld. CIT(A). He thus requested to send the Page | 3 matter back to the file of the AO for examination of the details furnished by the assessee. On merits, ld. Sr. DR placed reliance on the order of the AO and requested for restoration of the additions made by AO.

On the other hand, ld.AR of the assessee submits that assessee had not received any notice issued by AO and when he received the intimation of passing the assessment order, he filed the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and also filed all the relevant details in support of the source of investment in FDR and loan given as additional evidences. During appellate proceedings, the appellant has submitted that he is a farmer having agricultural land and does not have taxable income and therefore, does not file his regular return of income. It was further submitted by ld. AR that assessee had received compensation of Rs. 3,18,04,208/- from the State Government of Haryana towards compulsory acquisition of agricultural land in terms of Gazette notification No. 3212-R-2010 dated 09.12.2010 and compensation was received by award No. 25 dated 29.12.2015. The ld. AR stated that in support the same, copy of bank account No. 03361000005562 with Punjab & Sindh Bank, Sarita Vihar, New Delhi, copy of letter issued from Land Acquisition Officer dated 05.12.2015 reflecting amount of compensation of Rs. 3,18,04,208/-, Copy of 26AS for FY 2016-17 showing Time Deposit amount of Rs. 1,01,68,750/- and Copy of 26AS for FY 2017-18 showing entry of interest amount of Rs. 1,93,496/- were submitted as additional evidences before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. AR further stated that all these evidences were filed alongwith the appeal memo and ld.AO despite of sufficient opportunity, had not submitted his comments on the documents so filed as additional evidences. He further submitted that ld. CIT(A) by observing that these are crucial and goes to the root of the matter, had admitted the same and after considering and verifying the contents of these documents, deleted the additions. He thus, prayed for the confirmation of the order of ld. CIT(A).

Heard both the parties and perused the material available on records. A perusal of the order of ld. CIT(A) clearly shows that the ld. CIT(A) has send the additional evidences filed by the assessee to the AO for his comments. When the AO has failed to submit remand report, ld. CIT(A) proceeded to decide the appeal after considering the details filed by the assessee. Before us, no reason was given for non-submission of remand report by AO, and a request is made to remand back the matter to the file of AO. It is undisputed fact that assessee is an agriculturist and received compensation on the compulsory acquisition of his agricultural land by Government of Haryana, which was received in the year 2016. It is also established by the assessee that the amount of compensation of Rs. 3,18,04,208/- was the immediate and only source for making investment in FDR and for providing loan to M/s Nitco Technology. The ld. CIT(A) after verifying these facts from the documents filed as additional evidences, had deleted the additions by making following observations:

From the perusal of the observation of ld. CIT(A), it could be seen that he has followed the due procedure for admission of the additional evidences filed by assessee under Rule 46A of Income Tax Rules, 1962 by sending the same to the AO with the directions to consider and verify the facts and when the AO had failed to do so, the CIT(A) used his coterminous powers and proceeded to verify the details filed by the assessee. Before us also, the revenue except requesting for remand back the matter, has failed to controvert the findings given by ld. CIT(A) which are based on the due verification of the documents filed by the assessee as additional evidences. Under these circumstances and on careful consideration of the facts of the case, we find no infirmity in the observations made by ld. CIT(A) while deleting the additions. Thus, we do not interfere in the findings of ld. CIT(A) which are hereby upheld. Accordingly both the grounds of appeal of the revenue are dismissed.

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed.