SURESH CHAND,GURGAON vs. ITO,WARD 4(1),GURGAON, GURGAON

At the outset, we find that there is delay in filing of appeal by the assessee before us by 105 days. Considering the reasons adduced in the condonation petition, we are inclined to condone the delay and admit the appeal of the assessee for adjudication.

The main grievance of the assessee is that the additional evidences furnished by the assessee before ld CIT(A) were not admitted on the ground that the same was not accompanied with the petition for admission of additional evidence. In our considered opinion, this is only a technical breach though substantially the entire evidences in support of the contentions of the assessee were sought to be submitted by the assessee before the ld CIT(A) in the form of additional evidences. Hence, the same ought to have been admitted by the ld CIT(A) in the interest of justice. Hence, we direct the ld CIT(A) to admit the additional evidences submitted by the assessee and decide the entire issues in dispute afresh in accordance with law in the light of evidences submitted by the assessee. The assessee is also given liberty to furnish additional evidences, if any, and raise additional grounds, if any, in support of his contentions. Needless to mention that the assessee be given reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is also directed to co-operate with the ld. NFAC for expeditious disposal of the appeal by not taking adjournments except due to unavoidable or exceptional circumstances.

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