SRI. H.S. SURESH,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE

Without going into the merits of the case at the outset, the Ld.AR submitted that additional evidences were filed before the Page 2 & 39/Bang/2021 Ld.CIT(A) however the same were not considered by observing as under: “15. The AO has made the additions for want of confirmations from the persons from whom the appellant claims to have received the monies. The appellant has filed certain additional evidences during the course of this appeal in support of his stand. These additional evidences, filed now, cannot be admitted as the appellant has not given any satisfactory reason as to why the same could not be filed during the course of assessment proceeding. The addition made thus stands confirmed.”

The above observation has been made by Ld.CIT(A) in the impugned order for A.Y. 2008-09.

For A.Y. 2012-13, the assessee had filed additional evidence before the Ld.CIT(A) which is placed at pages 54-97 of the paper book and for A.Y. 2008-09, the additional evidence filed before the Ld.CIT(A) is placed at pages 42-60. On perusal of the impugned orders for both the years under consideration, we note that the Ld.CIT(A) has decided the issue on merits without admitting the additional evidence by observing that the same were not filed before the Ld.AO. 4.1 In our opinion, the Ld.CIT(A) should have admitted the additional evidence and should have called for a remand report from the Ld.AO in respect of the same. Principles of natural justice has not been followed in its true sense while deciding the issue on merits and therefore we are inclined to remand these appeals back to Ld.CIT(A). The Ld.CIT(A) shall call for a remand report from the Ld.AO, cause necessary verification in respect of issues alleged by the assessee on merits, then pass a reasoned order in accordance with law. Needless to say that proper opportunity of being heard must be granted to assessee.