CHANDRESH PRANLAL DOSHI,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 26(1)(3), MUMBAI

The only common issue in both the appeals of assessee is as regards to the order of CIT(A) sustaining the disallowance of expenses for non-deduction of TDS under section 194C and thereby applying the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act for disallowance of expenses. For Assessment Year 2011-12, the disallowance was to the tune of Rs.19,20,350/-. The disallowance for Assessment Year 2012-13 is to the tune of ₹11,49,910/-.

At the outset, the learned Counsel for the assessee read out the ground No.3(a) that the CIT(A) has rejected the additional evidence filed before her during the course of appeal hearing under Rule 46A of Income Tax Rule, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as 'Rules’) and refused to admit the said documents without any justification. Now, the learned Counsel for the assessee also stated that the assessee has filed additional evidences under Rule 29 of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963, for both the assessment years i.e. Assessment Year 2011-12 and 2012-13. 4. I have gone through the evidences filed before me and noted that these are original evidences and assessee could not file before the Assessing Officer but these are substantial evidences to decide the issue. In the interest of justice I admit these evidences and remand the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The CIT(A) is directed to consider these evidences and then decide the issue in both the years.

In regard to Assessment Year 2012-13, there is one more ground i.e. regarding sustenance of addition under section 69 of the Act of ₹9 lacs being capital introduced by assessee by Chandresh Pranlal Doshi, AYs;11 -12 & 12-13 transfer of money from assessee’s saving account to his property concerned account. For this, assessee has also filed additional evidence which is not been admitted by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). On the similar issue, I have already admitted the additional evidences on account of the issue of disallowance of expenses under section 40a(ia) and remand the matter back to the file of the CIT(A). Hence, in this issue also I admit this additional evidences and remit the matter back to the file of CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

In the result both the appeals of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 28.09.2021. (भहावीय स िंह /MAHAVIR SINGH) (उऩाध्मक्ष / VICE PRESIDENT) भ िंफई, ददनािंक/ Mumbai, Dated: 28.09.2021 सुदीप सरकार, व.निजी सचिव / Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS आदेश की प्रनिलऱपप अग्रेपषि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अऩीराथी / The Appellant 1. प्रत्मथी / The Respondent. 2. आमकय आम क्त(अऩीर) / The CIT(A) 3. आमकय आम क्त / CIT 4. ववबागीम प्रतततनधध, आमकय अऩीरीम अधधकयण, भ िंफई / DR, ITAT,

Mumbai गार्ड पाईर / Guard file. 6. आदेशािुसार/ BY ORDER, त्मावऩत प्रतत //// उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Asstt.