VIPUL S. MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 14(1), MUMBAI

The assessee has filed an application along with additional evidence. The crux of the argument is that the assessee could not produce the documents contain in paper book II, which were never asked by the authorities to produce and thus without providing reasonable opportunity, the case was decided. It was contended that the additional evidence filed before this Tribunal goes to the root of the matter and are necessary to be looked into for fair disposal of the appeal. On the other hand, the Ld. DR, contended that it was the duty of the assessee to file the evidence, if any, before the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal).

2.1. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The assessee has filed additional evidence (paper book No.II) containing various documents like letter dated 15/02/2007 showing the request of acquisition of the property by M/s Vogue Property Developer Pvt. Ltd., Letter to the Company showing acceptance, copy of the resolution passed by the 3 Vipul S. Mehta Board meeting for acquiring the property of the assessee, MOU between the assessee and the company dated 01/03/2007, letter of the company dated 05/03/2007, showing payment of first installment to the assessee and various other letters as contained in the aforesaid paper book running into 1 to 76 pages. Considering the totality of facts, we admit this additional ground and direct the assessee to approach the office of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) to file the additional evidence before him and explain the factual matrix. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) is directed to examine the claim of the assessee to his satisfaction and decide afresh in accordance with law. The assessee be given opportunity of being heard, thus, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.