Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’ : NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI H.S. SIDHU
The Assessee has filed the Appeal against the Order dated 01.5.2018 of the Ld. CIT(A)-21, New Delhi pertaining to assessment year 2013-14 on the following grounds:- i) That under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in accepting the addition of 9 lakhs to my income by AO, without applying her mind into the evidence produced by me during appeal proceedings. ii) That under the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in rejecting my evidence as it was not filed under Rule 46A.
iii) That under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in approving the order of the AO that I concealed income. iv) That the appellant craves leave to add to, alter, amend, modify, substitute, delete and / or rescind all or any of the grounds of appeal on or before the final hearing, if necessary so arises.
The 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. 3. At the time of hearing, Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that it is a case where the Id. CIT(A) was not justified in rejecting any evidence as it was not under Rule 46A which were furnished by the assessee during the course of appellate proceedings and which are very essential in considering the issues in dispute and therefore, requested that the same may be admitted and issues in dispute may be set aside to the AO for fresh adjudication, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 4. On the contrary, Ld. DR relied upon the order of the authorities below, but have not raised any serious objection on the admission of evidences and the application u/R 46A filed before the Ld. CIT(A). 5. I have heard both the parties and perused the records
especially the Application under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules
filed before me enclosing therewith the proceedings of Anti
Corruption Bureau, Hyderabad dated 2.7.2012/ copy of agreement
between the assessee’s father and P. Yadagiri Rao and P.
Balakrishna, which are additional / fresh evidence, as the same
could not be produced before the AO due to illness of the his mother;
difficulty in collection of the document from Anti Corruption Bureau
and sufficient time was not given by the AO. I find considerable
cogency in the submissions of the Ld. counsel for the assessee that
Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in rejecting the additional / fresh
evidence, as aforesaid due to reasons given as mentioned above. I
further note that now the assessee has furnished the copies of those
documents which were furnished by the assessee during the course
of appellate proceedings in the shape of application u/r 46A and
which are very much relevant and essential in adjudicating the issues
in dispute. Hence, in the interest of justice, I admit the same and
set aside the issues in dispute to the file of the AO with the
directions to decide the same, afresh, as per law, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 03-01-2019.
Sd/- (H.S. SIDHU) JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dated :03-01-2019 SR BHATANGAR Copy forwarded to: 1.Appellant 2.Respondent 3.CIT 4.CIT(A), New Delhi. 5.CIT(ITAT), New Delhi. AR, ITAT NEW DELHI.