HARBLAS SINGH,AMBALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, AMBALA

PER RAJ PAL YADAV, VP The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short ‘the CIT(A)’] dated 14.05.2024 passed for assessment year 2015-16. 2. The assessee has taken seven grounds of appeal, however, his grievance revolves around two issues, namely, ld. A.Y. 2015-16 2

CIT (Appeals) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.58
lacs by rejecting his application for permission to adduce additional evidence under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Act.
3. The brief facts of the case are that assessment of the assessee was reopened for the reason that a sum of Rs.58 lacs was stated to be deposited in the Saving Bank Account with Axis Bank Ltd. The AO was of the view that inspite of repeated opportunities, assessee did not reply to the notices, hence he made an addition of Rs.58 lacs with the aid of Section 69A of the Income Tax Act.
He also made an addition of Rs.1,10,499/- on account of interest income received by the assessee.
4. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT
(Appeals). He has filed an application for permission to adduce additional evidence. He has contended that alongwith his brother, he has sold agriculture land measuring 35 kanal for a consideration of Rs.88,94,000/-. The assessee has equal share, thus, he got roughly Rs.44,47,000/-. Out of that,
Rs.35 lacs was received between 14.07.2014 to 16.09.2014
and this amount was deposited in the Axis Bank Ltd. The A.Y. 2015-16
3

source of deposit was sale proceed of the agriculture land.
Some how, ld. CIT (Appeals) did not entertain the additional evidence and confirmed the additions.
5. Before us, ld. counsel for the assessee reiterated the same. On the other hand, ld. DR contended that sufficient opportunities were given to the assessee. He failed to adduce any evidence in support of his case.
6. We have duly considered the rival contentions and gone through the record carefully. The assessee has filed an application for permission to adduce additional evidence under Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules. This Rule contemplates that parties to the appeal shall not be entitled to produce any evidence unless necessity is being felt by the Tribunal for deciding the appeal justifiably. In other words, parties to the appeal are not entitled to adduce any evidence but if Tribunal feel necessary, then it could ask the parties to submit evidence and it can entertain such evidence. A perusal of the papers would indicate that assessee sought to file copy of the ‘Jamabandi’ of village Sonda. A perusal of the ‘Jamabandi’
would indicate that assessee Shri Gurdev Singh S/o Shri Inder
A.Y. 2015-16
4

Singh was having agriculture land alongwith other co-sharers.
The assessee, thereafter, placed on record copy of the Sale
Deed vide which agriculture land to the extent of 35 kanal was being sold by him and his brother. The Sale Deed Nos. are 135 dated 08.05.2014 and 139 dated 08.05.2014. Such Sale
Deeds are being registered at Sub