TRIBHUVAN JEWELLERS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 8(3)(2), MUMBAI

Per Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member:

3. At the outset, the ld. AR drew the attention of the Bench to the application dated 26.11.2018 wherein the assessee has filed additional evidences under Rule 29 of Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963. The ld. AR prayed before the Bench that these additional evidences could not be produced before the ld CIT(A) and AO due to several reasons which are beyond the control of the assessee and Tribhuvan Jewellers Ltd. these evidences go to the root of the issues raised by the assessee before this Hon’ble Tribunal. Accordingly, the ld. AR submitted before the Bench that the same may kindly be admitted for adjudication. The la AR requested before the bench to decide the appeal here or alternatively restore to the file of AO. The ld. DR on the other hand submitted that these additional evidences were not filed before the ld. CIT(A) during the appellate or before 6 the AO during assessment proceedings despite adequate opportunities given to the assessee and therefore the assessee has no locus standi to pray before the hon’ble court to admit these additional evidences. The ld DR submitted that accordingly the same kindly be dismissed.

4. After hearing both the parties and perusing the materials available on record, we observe that the additional evidences filed by the assessee has bearing on the issues as raised before us. These evidences were not filed before the authorities below in the assessment as well as appellate proceedings. Accordingly, in the interest of justice and fair play, we are of the view that the matter be restored to the file of AO for proper appreciation of these evidences so that the appeal of the assessee could be decided on merits as per facts and law. We, therefore, restore the appeal to the AO with the direction to decide the same as per facts and law after affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity.

Order pronounced in the open court on 30.01.2020.