What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal held that admitting additional evidence without giving the Assessing Officer an opportunity to examine it violates Rule 46A. Therefore, the case was remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination.

The assessee, engaged in real estate, declared a loss. The Assessing Officer made additions during assessment. The CIT(A) admitted additional evidence without confronting the Assessing Officer.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in admitting additional evidence without providing an opportunity to the Assessing Officer to examine it, in contravention of Rule 46A.

DCIT vs Friends Development Corporation… | ITAT Mumbai 2018

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES “I”, MUMBAI

Before: Shri JOGINDER SINGH, & Shri G. MANJUNATHA

For Respondent: Shri K Shivram (AR), Shri Rahul Hakani (AR)

Hearing: 14/06/2018

आदेश / O R D E R

Per Joginder Singh (Judicial Member) The Revenue is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 18.05.2016 of the learned First Appellate Authority on the grounds stated in the Grounds of appeal.

2. The first ground raised by the Revenue pertains to admitting the additional evidence by the learned CIT(A) without giving opportunity to the Assessing Officer to examine the additional evidence filed by the assessee, which is in contravention of Rule 46A of the Rules.

3. During hearing Shri Ashok Jha, learned CIT-DR, strongly pleaded the ground no.1 by advancing arguments which is identical to the ground raised. The learned counsel for the assessee- Dr. K Shivram fairly agreed that the learned Assessing Officer was not provided opportunity and additional evidence was filed by the assessee.

3 ITA 5177/Mum/2016 for A.Y 2012-13 Friends Development Corporation P Ltd 4. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The facts in brief are that the assessee is engaged in the business of real estate, building/developers declared loss of Rs. 17,78,48,397/- in its return filed on 30.09.2012. The assessment order was framed under section 143(3) on 16.08.2015 at an income of Rs. 31,12,365/-While framing the assessment the learned Assessing Officer made various additions/disallowances as has been mentioned in the assessment order.

On appeal before the learned CIT(A) the assessee filed additional evidences, which were considered and neither any remand report was sought from the Assessing Officer nor the additional evidence filed by the assessee was confronted to the Assessing Officer. Certainly, it is a violation Rule 46A of the rules. Therefore, without going into much deliberation, we remand this appeal to the file of the learned Assessing Officer to examine the factual matrix, uninfluenced by the observation made in the impugned order, and decide afresh in accordance with law. The assessee be given opportunity to file evidence, if any, in support of its claim, with further liberty of 4 ITA 5177/Mum/2016 for A.Y 2012-13 Friends Development Corporation P Ltd opportunity of being heard. Thus, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes only.

Finally, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes only.

This Order was pronounced in the open court in the presence of ld. representatives from both sides at the conclusion of the hearing on 14/06/2018.

DCIT - 1(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. FRIENDS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION P. LTD., MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments