ITO, KOLKATA vs. OLIVIA DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

At the outset, we note that there is a delay of 54 days in filing the appeal by the Revenue for which a condonation petition was filed. After hearing both the parties and perusing the matters available on record, we find that the delay in filing the appeal is for sufficient reasons which appear to be genuine and bonafide and accordingly, the delay in filing the appeal of the Revenue is condoned.

In the appellate proceedings, the assessee filed necessary evidences fi before the ld. CIT (A) and ld. CIT (A) deleted the addition of holding that the assessee has proved the genuineness of all the above transactions even without calling for a remand report from the AO on additional evidences filed by the assessee in the form of sample copies of sale agreements as filed by the assessee in paper book from page no. 177 to 441 which were filed by the suo-motto. The ld DR pointed out that the in case of suo-motto evidences being filed by the assessee for the first time the AO has to be confronted and therefore the appellate order passed is against the principle of natural justice. In our opinion these issues are required to be examined thoroughly at the end of the ld. Assessing Officer. Accordingly, we restore this appeal to the file of the ld. AO with a direction to examine these evidences and decide the issue as per the facts and in accordance with the law after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose.