Loading judgment…
Facts
The Assessee's returned income was Rs. 9,77,000/-, but the assessment order computed it at Rs. 78,60,230/-. The Assessee appealed to the CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal. During the appellate proceedings before the CIT(A), the Assessee produced additional documents but failed to file a formal application for their admission.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the Assessee failed to file a proper application for admitting additional documents. However, in the interest of justice and equity, the Tribunal remanded the matter back to the CIT(A) to consider the additional evidence if the Assessee files the required application along with the documents.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in not admitting additional evidence without a formal application, and if the case should be remanded for fresh consideration of such evidence.
Sections Cited
143(3), 143(3A), 143(3B)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI
PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld.
Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), New Delhi dated 17/02/2025for the Assessment Year 2018-19.
Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 02/03/2021 u/s 143(3) r.w. Section 143(3A) and 143(3B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by computing the income of the Assessee at Rs. 78,60,230/-, as against the returned income of Rs. 9,77,000/- by making certain additions. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 02/03/2021, the Assessee preferred the Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 17/02/2025, dismissed the Appeal filed by the Assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Assessee preferred the present Appeal.
The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee vehemently submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has not admitted the evidences filed during the appellate proceedings on technicalities and order impugned has been passed in violation of principals of natural justice, thus, sought for allowing the appeal of the Assessee.
Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative relying on the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) sought for dismissal of the Appeal.
We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. During the appellate proceedings, the Assessee produced certain documents to substantiate its case, however, the Assessee filed the additional documents without filing the application of admission for additional evidence. Though, the Assessee is required to file application for admission of additional document, the Assessee failed to do so.
However, considering the issue involved in the present Appeal and in the interest of justice and equity, we remand the matter to the Ld. CIT(A) with a liberty to the Assessee to file application for admission of additional evidence along with the additional documents intended to be produced by the Assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) and if such application along with the documents is filed, Ld. CIT(A) is directed to consider the same and pass the order afresh in accordance with lawafter providing opportunity of being heard to the Assessee.
In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose.