Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
आदेश/Order
Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:
The present appeals have been preferred by the assessee against the separate orders dated 30.7.2017 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Gurgaon [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’].
Since common issues are involved in both the appeals, hence, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. The facts which are almost identical are being taken from ITA No. 1677/Chd/2017.
Both the appeals, as per the report of the Registry, are barred by limitation period of 59 days. A separate application for condonation of delay has been filed, wherein, it has been stated that the assessee had
ITA Nos. 1677 & 1678/Chd/2017- Ritu Chauhan, Shimla 2 handed over the papers to his C.A. Shri Manoj Gupta for filing the appeal,
however, the said C.A. could not file the appeal in time as the file got
misplaced in the office of the C.A. due to rush of tax audit. That when the
appellant enquired about his appeal, only then her C.A. made enquiry and
thereafter the papers were traced and immediately the appeal was filed.
The above plea has been supported with the affidavit of Shri Manoj Gupta,
C.A.
Considering the above submissions, the delay in filing the appeals is
hereby condoned.
On merits of ITA No.1677/Chd/2017, the Ld. Counsel for the 4.
assessee has submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the addition of
Rs. 7 lacs made by the Assessing officer u/s 68 of the Income-tax Act,
1961 (in short 'the Act') on the ground that the assessee had failed to
establish with cogent evidence that she had received the gift of Rs. 7 lacs
from her mother in the year under consideration. The Ld. Counsel for the
assessee has further invited our attention to para 5.2.2 of the appellate
order, wherein, the Ld. CIT(A) has mentioned that the assessee had filed
an application for additional evidence to prove the factum of the aforesaid
gift by the mother of the assessee. However, the Ld. CIT(A) without
considering the said evidences, rejected the application and thereby
confirmed the addition made by the Assessing officer. The Ld. Counsel for
the assessee has further invited our attention to the page 5 of the paper
book which is copy of the application for the additional evidence, whereby,
the assessee has sought permission to place on record the bank statement
recorded alongwith confirmation received from the mother of the assessee
and has further prayed that these evidences go to the root of the matter and
ITA Nos. 1677 & 1678/Chd/2017- Ritu Chauhan, Shimla 3 the same is required to be admitted as additional evidence. It has also been
explained in the said application that the bank account statement and
confirmation of the mother was not available with the assessee at that time.
The Ld. Counsel for the assessee in this respect has also invited our
attention to the copy of the bank statement and confirmation of the mother
of the assessee.
Since the additional evidence sought to the produced by the assessee
goes to the root of the case and is very essential for the just and proper
decision of the case, hence, in our view, the same is required to be
considered. We, therefore, set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restore
the matter to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to admit the additional
evidences sought to be produced by the assessee and give his findings on
the merits of the case after duly considering the evidences submitted by
the assessee in accordance with law.
The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
ITA No.1678/Chd/2017 –
The facts of this appeal are almost identical of that of ITA No.
1677/Chd/2017. In this case, the Assessing officer has made addition of
Rs. 3,60,321/- found credited in to the bank account of the assessee. The
assessee during the appellate proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A) had
sought to produce additional evidence to explain the source of the said
deposits into the bank account of the assessee. However, the Ld. CIT(A)
rejected the application for production of additional evidences and thereby
dismissed the appeal of the assessee. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has
invited our attention to page 5 of the paper book and submitted that the
ITA Nos. 1677 & 1678/Chd/2017- Ritu Chauhan, Shimla 4 said amount was received from Insurance company and, therefore, has sought to produce on the file the surrender letter received form M/s Birla Sun life Insurance Company in this respect and further the copy of the bank account statement etc.
In view of our above observations made, since these evidences go to the root of the case, hence, the impugned order of the CIT(A) is set aside on similar terms as directed above in ITA No. 1677/Chd/2017 and the matter in this appeal is also restored to the file of the CIT(A) for a decision afresh in accordance with law.
In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Sd/- Sd/- ( बी , आर . आर . कुमार / B.R.R. KUMAR) (संजय गग� / SANJAY GARG ) लेखा सद�य/ Accountant Member �या�यक सद�य /Judicial Member
Dated : 11.02.2019 “आर.के.” आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 2. ��यथ�/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�त/ CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य आ�धकरण, च�डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाड� फाईल/ Guard File
आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar