ANUKESH SHARMA,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), GHAZIABAD

Facts narrated by the revenue authorities are not disputed by both the parties, hence, the same are not repeated here for the sake of convenience.

At the time of hearing, Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that assessee has filed the Application for admission of additional evidences under Rule 46A of the I.T. Rules, 1962 before the Ld. CIT(A), but the same was wrongly rejected by the Ld. CIT(A) which is very much essential to substantiate the claim of the assessee. Assessee has also filed the Paper Book containing pages 1-118 in which he has attached various documents and the copy of submissions /Rule 46 A containing additional evidence at Annexure-A2 to 8. He stated that the issues in dispute requires thorough consideration at the level of the Assessing Officer, hence, he requested that the issues in dispute may be set aside to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication with the directions to accept all the evidences to be filed by the Assessee, which are very essential for determination of the matter.

On the contrary, Ld. DR did not raise any serious objection on the request of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee.

I have heard both the parties and perused the records especially the order of the revenue authorities including the Assessee’s Paper Book containing pages 1-118, in which Assessee’s Counsel has attached the copy of reasons recorded u/s. 148 of the Act; copy of communication of approval u/s. 151 of the I.T. Act from the office of Pr. CIT to Addl. CIT, received in his office on 30.3.3017; copy of communication of approval u/s. 151 of the I.T. Act from the office of Addl. CIT to ITO Ward 1(1), 2 received in his office on 30.3.3017; Copy of notice dated 29.3.2017 u/s. 148 of the I.T. Act; Copy of email notice dated 30.3.2017 u/s. 148 of the Act; certified copy of order sheet of assessment proceedings exhibiting issue of notice u/s. 148 on 29.3.2017; copy of PAN data extracted from I.T. Department. Website www.incometaxindiaefiling.gov.in; copy of ITR for AY 2016-17 filed on 5.8.2016; copy of enquiry letters by AO from HDFC Bank in the month of Oct/Dec/2017 and reply of HDFC Bank on response thereof on 13.12.2017; copy of ITR u/s. 148, TDS Certificate, Form 26AS etc.; copy of rely filed before AO; copy of submissions /Rule 46A application filed before Ld. CIT(A) 27.9.2018 containing additional evidence at Annexure A-2 to 8 thereof i.e. medical reports and death certificate of the mother of the appellant; copy of sale deed by mother of the appellant to explain source of cash in her hands; copy of cash receipt of sale of motor car; copy of ICICI bank statement of the appellant; copy of gift deed by maternal uncle of the appellant alongwith bank statement, pan card etc of the donor; copy of gift deed by uncle of the appellant alongwith bank statement, pan card etc. of the donor; copy of gift deed by father in law of the appellant alongwith bank statement, pan card etc. of the donor. I further note that Ld. CIT(A) has not allowed the assessee’s application filed under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 for admission of additional evidences, which are very essential in determination of the issues in dispute. Keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, in my opinion, the issues in dispute require thorough examination and fresh adjudication at the level of the Assessing Officer. Therefore, I remit back the issues in dispute to the files of the Assessing Officer with the directions to decide the same afresh, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and consider all the evidences to be filed by the Assessee. Assessee is also directed through his Counsel to fully cooperate with the Assessing Officer during the proceedings and will not take any unnecessary adjournment. Assessee is at liberty to file any evidences for substantiating its claim. 3

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.