SMT. SUSHILA AGARWAL,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3531/DEL/2014Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 November 2016AY 2003-043 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal decided to set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to the Assessing Officer (AO) for a fresh decision. This was to allow the AO to consider the additional evidence filed by the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2003-04. The assessee also sought to admit additional evidence which was claimed to be crucial to the appeal's issues.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether additional evidence, filed for the first time before the Tribunal, should be admitted and considered for deciding the appeal.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH : SMC-1 : NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Aggarwal, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr.DR
Hearing: 03.11.2016Pronounced: 04.11.2016

Appellant by : Shri Ankit Aggarwal, Advocate Respondent by: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 03.11.2016 Date of Pronouncement: 04.11.2016 ORDER

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A) on 20.2.2014 in relation to the Assessment Year 2003-04.

2.

It is a recalled matter inasmuch as the earlier ex parte order passed by the tribunal was subsequently recalled vide its later order.

3.

The assessee has filed concise grounds of appeal. In addition, the assessee has also filed an application under Rule 29 of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963, praying for admission of additional evidence which is claimed to be going to the root of the matter qua the issues assailed in the instant appeal. It was, therefore, prayed that the additional evidence be admitted. The ld. DR did not raise any serious objection to the admission of additional evidence.

4. In view of such additional evidence which has been filed before me for the first time and which has been claimed to have a bearing on the issues in appeal, I consider it expedient to set aside the impugned order and remit the matter to the file of AO for deciding the issue afresh in the light of such additional evidence filed by the assessee. Needless to say, the assessee will be allowed a reasonable opportunity of being heard in such fresh proceedings.

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →