No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH : C : NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI R.K. PANDA & SHRI KULDIP SINGH
ORDER
PER R.K. PANDA, AM:
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 23rd June, 2015 passed by the CIT(A), Ghaziabad, relation to the Assessment Year 2011-12.
Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, they all relate to the order of the CIT(A) in confirming the various additions made by the Assessing Officer wherein the income was assessed at Rs.64,43,920/- as against Rs.1,62,800/- declared by the assessee in the return of income.
Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and filed his return of income on 29th June, 2011 declaring the total income at Rs.62,800/-. The assessee derives income from salary, interest income and income from other sources.
The Assessing Officer, in the order passed u/s 143(3), made addition of Rs.61,38,350/- on account of unexplained credits, Rs.1,18,325/- on account of undisclosed interest income and Rs.24,438/- being disallowance of extra deduction u/s 80C of the IT Act.
In appeal, the ld.CIT(A) upheld the various additions made by the Assessing Officer.
Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.
The ld. counsel for the assessee filed an application for admission of additional evidence under Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules. Referring to the voluminous evidences filed in the shape of a paper book containing 513 pages, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that huge effort was required on behalf of the assessee to collect the various evidences from third parties to substantiate his case. He submitted that the assessee was prevented by sufficient causes in producing these evidences before the Assessing Officer due to paucity of time. Referring to the order of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for the immediately preceding assessment year, he submitted that the Tribunal, after considering the additional evidences has restored the matter to the 2 file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication of the issue. He, accordingly submitted that he has no objection if the matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer. Even otherwise also he submitted that he is in a position to argue his case on merit.
The ld. DR, on the other hand, strongly opposed the additional evidences filed by the assessee. He submitted that there is no reason for the assessee for non- submission of these details before the Assessing Officer, therefore, the additional evidences should not be admitted and the appeal filed by the assessee should be dismissed since the ld.CIT(A) has passed a very speaking order on the various issues.
We have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides and perused the material available on record. We find as against the returned income of Rs.1,62,800/-, the Assessing Officer has completed the assessment determining the total income at Rs.64,43,920/-, wherein huge additions have been made on account of unexplained credits apart from addition on account of interest income and disallowance of extra deduction u/s 80C. We find the assessee has filed certain additional evidences and has requested the Tribunal to accept these evidences under Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules.
These evidences, in our opinion, go to the root of the matter and in the interest of justice the assessee should be given an opportunity to substantiate his case. We further find, under similar circumstances, the Tribunal in assessee’s own case in the immediately preceding assessment year, vide order dated 25th January, 2017, has admitted the additional evidences and has restored the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for denovo adjudication in accordance with the law. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, we admit the additional evidences and restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to decide the issue afresh and in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.