DILIP N. YAGNIK,MUMBAI vs. ITO 12(2)(3), MUMBAI

During the course of hearing, Shri Dilip Yagnik appeared personally and submitted that his C.A. was out of town and, therefore, he was not in a position to represent the case. It was further brought to our notice by him that various evidences were submitted by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings and these were shown to Ld.CIT(A). But none of the authorities have properly appreciated the evidences. The disallowance haves been made wrongly. Disallowance with regard to gratuity could not have been made at all. Other disallowances are also incorrect on facts and law. Under these circumstances, if n opportunity is given before the Assessing Officer, all these things can be shown again to satisfy the doubts of the Assessing Officer.

Per contra, the ld.DR also clearly stated that this case can be sent back to the Assessing Officer for examination of all the details and evidences submitted in the paper book of the assessee.

We have gone through the orders of lower authorities as well as the paper book shown before us. In our opinion, the assessee deserves one more opportunity before the Assessing Officer. Under these circumstances, we remand the issues before us back to the file of the Assessing Officer for their examination afresh. The assessee shall submit all the details and evidences in support of his claim. The Assessing Officer shall examine the same on objective basis and shall give adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee for any doubts which, the Assessing Officer may have. The assessee shall also extend requisite cooperation to the Assessing Officer. With these directions, the issues raised before us are sent back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh examination and passing the fresh assessment order.

As a result, all these grounds and assessee’s appeal are allowed, for statistical purpose.