SUWA LAL YADAV,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR Jh HkkxpUn] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 706/JP/2016 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2008-09 cuke Shri Sua Lal Yadav The ITO Vs. S/o Shri Narayan Lal Yadav Ward- Anandpuri Ki Dhani Jaipur Devthala Road, Village: Niwania Tehsil –Chomu, Distt. Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ALAPL 6027 D vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent

fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by: Shri C.L. Yadav, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by :Smt. Poonam Rai, DCIT- DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 10/02/2017 ?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 13/02/2017 vkns'k@ ORDER PER BHAGCHAND, AM The assessee has filed an appeal against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-III, Jaipur dated 29-04-2016 for the assessment year 2008-09 raising therein following ground of appeal. ‘’1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITO Ward- 7(3), Jaipur erred and ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming in disallowing the cost and improvement of property of Rs. 16,000/- and Rs. 1,30,000/- respectively in calculating capital gain ignoring the submission of assessee, which is liable to be quashed.

2 ITA No. 706/JP/2016 Shri Sua Lal Yadav vs. ITO, Ward- 7(3),Jaipur . 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITO Ward- 7(3), Jaipur erred and ld. CIT(A) erred in adding Rs. 15,85,250/- u/s 50C of the I.T. Act, 1961 without appreciating evidences and without referring to Valuation Cell which is unjustified, illegal and liable to be deleted.

2.1 During the course of hearing, it is noted that the ld. AR of the

assessee filed an application dated 12-01-2017 praying therein to consider

the additional evidence under rule 29 of the ITAT, rules, 1963. Further it

is noted that the assessee has also filed the paper book containing pages 1

to 31 concerning the case. The submission of the ld. AR assessee is as

under:-

‘’The case of the appellant was completed u/s 144 r/w 147 by the AO. The assessee had submitted the details as asked for vide query letter dated 29-04-2013.Thereafter the AO, issued show cause notice under the first proviso to Section 144 (1) fixing the case for 25-07-2013, to which a detailed reply was filed and the case was discussed. Still, the AO went on to complete the assessment u/s 144.

It would not be out of place to mention that the assessee's brother-in-law was hospitalized during the period and was in a critical condition that the non-compliance on one occasion had been on account of the same. Being in a disturbed state of mind and due to paucity of time, the appellant could not produce the required evidence in his support. The evidence being produced are relevant

3 ITA No. 706/JP/2016 Shri Sua Lal Yadav vs. ITO, Ward- 7(3),Jaipur . documents to prove the matter to be decided by the Hon'ble Tribunal. It is therefore, requested that the Tribunal may kindly permit the appellant to adduce the additional evidence and consider the same as the documents have a direct bearing.’’

2.2 The ld. DR opposed the application of the ld. AR of the assessee

relating to filing the additional evidence in this case.

2.3 I have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials

available on record. Looking to the present facts and circumstances of the

case alongwith facts mentioned in the application of the assessee under

rule 29 of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963, it will be in the

interest of equity and justice to consider the application of the assessee

relating to filing of additional evidence under Rule 29 of ITAT rules.

Hence, the additional evidence filed by the assessee alongwith the

application dated 12-01-2017 are admitted. The grounds of appeal as

raised by the assessee before this Bench reproduced in para 1 of this

order are restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to decide it afresh by

providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The

assessee is also directed to produce all these additional evidences before

the ld. CIT(A) for afresh adjudication. Thus the appeal of the assessee is

allowed for statistical purposes.

4 ITA No. 706/JP/2016 Shri Sua Lal Yadav vs. ITO, Ward- 7(3),Jaipur . 4.0 In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes The order is pronounced in the open Court on 13-02-2017.

Sd/- ¼HkkxpUn½ (Bhagchand) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 13 /02/ 2017 *Mishra आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेषित@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Shri Sua Lal Yadav, Jaipur 1. 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The ITO, Ward- 7(3), Jaipur vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@ CIT(A). 3. 4. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT, विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत 5. 6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No.706/JP/2016) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@ Aेेपेजंदज. त्महपेजतंत