SHREE DEVDAYA EDUCATION AND CHARITABLE TRUST,BHUTKOTDA vs. ITO EXEMPTION WD 1,RAJKOT, RAJKOT

Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT (A), where the Ld. CIT (A) dismissed the appeal and sustained the addition made by the Assessing Officer.

Still aggrieved, the assessee is before this Tribunal.

At the time of hearing the Ld. AR submitted that during the appellate proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee had filed additional evidence in support of its claim. However, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate and properly consider the said additional evidence. It was contended that although a remand report was called for from the Assessing Officer, instead of examining the additional evidence and furnishing his comments thereon, the Assessing Officer merely stated that such documents had not been produced during the assessment proceedings and, therefore, could not be accepted. According to the Ld. AR, the duty of the Assessing Officer while furnishing a remand report is to examine the additional evidence on merits and offer his comments regarding its genuineness, relevance and evidentiary value, rather than rejecting it solely on the ground that it was not produced during the

On the other hand, the Ld. DR, relied upon the orders of the authorities below.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is an admitted position that the assessee had filed additional evidence before the Ld. CIT(A), who, in turn, called for a remand report from the Assessing Officer. However, the Assessing Officer, instead of examining the additional evidence and recording his findings thereon, merely stated that the documents had not been produced during the course of the assessment proceedings and, therefore, should not be accepted. Such an approach is not in accordance with the purpose of seeking a remand report. Once additional evidence is admitted or called for examination, the Assessing Officer is required to verify the documents and furnish his comments on their authenticity, relevance and evidentiary value. The remand report in the present case is completely silent on the merits of the additional evidence. The Ld. CIT(A), without ensuring proper examination of the additional evidence, proceeded to reject the assessee’s claim. In these circumstances, and in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue and restore the matter to the file AO with a direction to re-examine the additional evidence filed by the Assessee. The Assessing Officer shall examine the additional evidence on merits and furnish his comments thereon, and thereafter shall pass a fresh speaking order in accordance with law after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.