SANGRAM AVINASH PATIL,RAIGAD vs. ITO WD 2, PANVEL

The learned counsel appeared for the assessee moved an application for admission of certain additional evidence. He further submitted that the assessee has obtained funds from his close relatives who are having sufficient agricultural income. At the time of hearing, the assessee was not in a position to furnish the details of agricultural holding and hence the Assessing Officer as well as learned CIT(A) added the loan amounts u/s 68 of the Act by holding that the assessee has not treated the creditworthiness of the creditors. The learned AR submitted that the assessee has now furnished the details of agricultural holding by way of additional evidences and accordingly prayed that these evidences may kindly be admitted.

We have heard the learned DR and perused the record we notice that the addition made u/s. 68 of the Act has been confirmed by the learned CIT(A) on the ground that the assessee has failed to prove the creditworthiness of the creditors. Now the assessee has filed certain additional evidences to prove the creditworthiness of the creditors hence in the interest of natural justice we admit these additional evidences. Since additional evidences requires examination at the end of Assessing Officer we set aside the order of learned CIT(A) and restore the matter to the file of Assessing Officer.

It is asserted that certain creditors are not co-operating with the Assessing Officer and hence the Assessing Officer may kindly be directed to examine them by issuing summons. Since the entire issues

In result the appeal filed by the Assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose.