DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. HARING INDIA PVT. LTD, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3080/DEL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 July 2018AY 2004-055 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that no additional evidence was filed by the assessee or accepted by the CIT(A). Since the Revenue's sole ground of appeal was based on this premise, and no other grounds on merits were raised, the appeal was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order, raising a solitary ground that the CIT(A) erred in accepting additional evidence in violation of Rule 46A. However, during the hearing, neither the Revenue nor the assessee could demonstrate that any additional evidence was filed or accepted.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in accepting additional evidence in violation of Rule 46A of the IT Rules, 1962, when no such evidence was actually filed or accepted.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Rule 46A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘C’: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI S.K. YADAV & SHRI B.R.R. KUMAR

For Appellant: CA &
For Respondent: DR Assessee by : Sh. Suresh Gupta, CA &
Hearing: 05.07.2018

The Revenue has filed an appeal against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-15, 104, Aaykar Bhawan, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi-110092 dated 17.02.2015, pertaining to Assessment Year 2004-05 wherein the Revenue has raised the solitary ground as under:-.

“ 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in accepting additional evidences in violation of the Rule 46A of the I.T. Rule, 1962.”

2.

On perusal of the Ld. CIT(A), it was found that, no additional evidences have been filed by the Assessee or accepted by the Ld. CIT(A).

3.

During the hearing, the Ld. DR could not bring to our notice any additional evidences that have been submitted before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. AR contended that no additional evidences as defined under Rule 46A have been filed before the Ld. CIT(A).

4.

In the absence of demonstration of filing of additional evidences, the grounds taken by the Department do not survive. The Revenue has not taken any ground on merits of the case. Hence appeal filed by the Revenue deserves to be dismissed.

5.

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 06/7/2018

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →