SHRI. ASHOK BABULAL SHAH,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(3), BENGALURU

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2669/BANG/2017Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 February 2020AY 2012-132 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal admitted the additional evidence submitted by the assessee. The matter was restored to the AO for a fresh decision after considering the additional evidence and providing the assessee with a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) involved an addition of Rs. 73,46,500/- made by the AO. The assessee submitted confirmations from 16 persons as additional evidence before the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in refusing to admit additional evidence submitted by the assessee. The admissibility of additional evidence that goes to the root of the matter.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, AM & SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JM

For Respondent: Shri Kabila H, JCIT DR
Hearing: 05.02.2020Pronounced: 12.02.2020

O R D E R

PER SHRI A.K. GARODIA, AM:

1.

This appeal is filed by the assesse and it is directed against the order of CIT(A) – 7 Bengaluru dated 12.10.2017.

2.

Apart from grounds on merit, this is one of the grounds raised

by the assessee that the learned CIT (A) was not justified in refusing to admit the additional evidence submitted by the assessee before him.

3. In course of hearing, learned AR of the assessee submitted that it is noted by CIT (A) in para 6 of his order that the assessee submitted confirmations from 16 persons in absence of which, the AO made addition of Rs. 73,46,500/-. He submitted that learned CIT (A) did not admit the same as additional evidence. He submitted that additional evidence goes to the root of the matter and therefore, in the interest of justice, it should be admitted and the matter be restored to AO for fresh decision after considering the additional evidence and (B)/2017 Page 2 of 2 after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Learned DR of the revenue supported the order of CIT (A).

4.

We have considered the rival submission. In the interest of justice and in the facts of the present case, we admit the additional evidence and restore the entire matter back to AO for a fresh decision after considering the additional evidence and after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. In view of this decision, no adjudication on merit is called for at the present stage.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →