Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RANCHI ‘ SMC’ BENCH, RANCHI
Before: SHRI N.S SAINI
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RANCHI ‘ SMC’ BENCH, RANCHI
BEFORE SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No274/Ran/2017 Assessment Year : 2006-07
Hari Narain Rai, R/O. Vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Ranchi. Sonaraithari, Dist: Deogarh, Jharkhand PAN/GIR No.AHOPR 6758 D (Appellant) .. ( Respondent)
Assessee by : Shri M.K.Choudhary, Adv Revenue by : Shri A.K.Mohanty, JCIT
Date of Hearing : 27/11/ 2018 Date of Pronouncement : 28 /11/ 2018
O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of
the CIT(A), Ranchi, dated 21.8.2017 for the assessment year
2006-07.
In Ground No.1 of appeal, the grievance of the assessee is
that the CIT(A) decided the appeal of the assessee without
admitting additional evidences filed before him.
The brief facts of the case are that during the course of
appeal hearing before the CIT(A), the assessee filed bank
statement, balance sheet etc., and requested the CIT(A) to admit
the same. The CIT(A) did not accept the additional evidences filed
P a g e 1 | 3
ITA No 274/R an/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 06- 07
before him observing that notice under section 148 of the Act was
issued on 12.1.2009 and for the next seven months, the assessee
took no step to ensure compliance. The evidences now sought for
admission is also not of the nature that would have required the
assessee to spend time and energy. These are not third party
evidences but those belonging to his wife in the form of bank
details. Therefore, the assessee has not been able to make any
good case for admission of additional evidence and hence, they
are not admitted.
Ld Authorised Representative submitted that it would cause
irreparable loss to the assessee if the additional evidences
produced before the CIT(A) are not considered before deciding the
appeal of the assessee. He prayed that in order to render justice
to the assessee, the Tribunal should direct the CIT(A) to consider
the additional evidences filed before him and adjudicate the
appeal afresh after hearing the assessee.
On the other hand, ld Departmental Representative did not
object to the above submission of ld Authorised representative of
the assessee.
In the given facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the
considered opinion that in order to render substantial justice, the
P a g e 2 | 3
ITA No 274/R an/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 06- 07
CIT(A) should consider all the evidences produced before him in
the form of additional evidences and thereafter adjudicate the
appeal of the assessee after allowing reasonable and proper
opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Therefore, I set aside the
order of the CIT(A) and remand the matter back to his file for
adjudicating the appeal of the assessee afresh as per law and
after allowing reasonable and proper opportunity of hearing to
the assessee.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for
statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 28 /11/2018. Sd/- (N.S Saini) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ranchi; Dated 28 /11/2018 B.K.Parida, SPS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. :Hari Narain Rai, R/O. The Appellant Sonaraithari, Dist: Deogarh, Jharkhand 2. The respondent: DCIT, Circle-1, Ranchi. 3. The CIT(A)- Ranchi 4. Pr.CIT- Ranchi 5. DR, ITAT, Ranchi 6. Guard file. //True Copy// By order
Sr. Pvt. Secretary, ITAT, Ranchi on tour
P a g e 3 | 3