KARTIK BALAJI TANGADKAR,,AHMEDNAGAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, AHMEDNAGAR CIRCLE ,, AHMEDNAGAR

The Learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.10,70,000/-, made under section 68 of the I T Act, without considering the evidences furnished before him and also without appreciating that the Learned ACIT had not allowed fair and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

The appellant craves leave to furnish Additional Evidence which may be relevant to the above Grounds of Appeal in course of the appeal proceedings.

The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any of the above Grounds of Appeal or to add new Grounds of Appeal during the course of appeal proceedings.”

At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee brought my attention to the additional evidence relating to the addition of Rs.10.70 lakhs made by the Assessing Officer in the assessment under section 68 of the Act and made the following prayer: “In the above appeal, fixed before the Hon'ble SMC Bench, addition of Rs.10,70,000/- made by the Ld ACIT, Ahmednagar Circle, is disputed. The Ld ACIT did not call for specific information or documents in respect of the loans taken by the assessee from family members. The assessee furnished copies of Income Tax Returns of the creditors and copies of their Bank Statements. The Ld ACIT treated the source of the loans as unexplained and made addition under section 68 of the I T Act. The assessee submitted certain Additional Evidences before the Ld C1T(A). List of these documents is given on page 7 of the Appellate Order. The Ld CIT(A) did not consider these evidences and dismissed the appeal primarily on the basis of surmises and presumptions. The assessee is aggrieved with the orders of the lower authorities. The assessee is submitting herewith Confirmation Letters from the three creditors and copy of Gift Deed for gift received by Shri Sushant Tangadkar by way of Additional Evidences. These evidences go to the root of the Grounds of Appeal. The Hon'ble Bench may kindly invoke the provisions of Rule 29 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 and admit these evidences before deciding the assessee's appeal.”

On hearing the preliminary issue relating to the admission of additional evidence from both the sides, where the Ld. DR opposed strongly, the additional evidence furnished by the assessee by way of confirmation letters and gift deed received by Shri Sushant Tangadkarfrom Shri Ashok B. Tangadkar, I am of the opinion that the said additional evidence should be admitted in the interest of justice. Having been admitted the same in view of the principles of natural justice, the entire issue along with additional evidences are required to be remanded to the file of Assessing Officer for meaningful adjudication of the issue. Accordingly, all the issues raised by the assessee involving addition of Rs.10.70 lakhs stands remanded back to the file of Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer shall grant reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee, examine the evidences and bonafide of the same and pass speaking order. The concise grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 01st day of March, 2019. (D. KARUNAKARA RAO) लेखा सद" / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; "दनांक Dated : 01st March, 2019. GCVSR आदेश क" "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत/Copy of the Order is forwarded to : अपीलाथ" / The Appellant;

The Pr.CIT-1, Pune; िवभागीय "ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे “एक-सद"य मामला” /

DR ‘SMC’, ITAT, Pune; गाड" फाईल / Guard file. 6. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स"यािपत "ित //// Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune