ARVIND SAROHA,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 65(3),, NEW DELHI

Before us, the Ld. AR stated that while it is true that the assessee could not present himself before the AO, but he did make efforts to file evidences before the Ld. CIT(A), which was unfortunately rejected. It was the submission that the assessee deserves another chance to present the facts before the Ld. AO. 3. We have heard the submissions of Ld. AR/DR and have gone through the records before us. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) has indeed refuse to admit additional evidence filed by the assessee before him. Due to this fact, we are inclined to agree with the Ld. AR that the opportunity available to the assessee for presenting facts before the Ld. CIT(A) was duly availed off by the assessee and since the fresh evidence was not admitted,hence, the assessee has no option but to plead that he may be given another chance to present the facts. Considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, we are inclined to agree with the Ld. AR. We, accordingly, set aside the impugned order and remand this matter back to the file of the Ld. AO for fresh assessment, after entertaining all the evidences that the assessee would file before him in support of his claim. Needless to say, the Ld. CIT(A) would also call for a remand report from the AO. 4. In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. 3