PARIN A. SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ITO 23(3)(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3040/MUM/2013Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 November 2015AY 2009-103 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal admitted the additional evidence but remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer for examination and decision, ensuring natural justice. Both the assessee's and Revenue's appeals were allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed additional evidence before the ITAT, which was not produced before the lower authorities. The Revenue objected to its admission, stating they couldn't examine its correctness.

What were the issues?

Whether additional evidence filed before the ITAT should be admitted and examined by the Assessing Officer.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES “C”, MUMBAI

Before: Shri Joginder Singh, & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. K.Shivaram
For Respondent: Shri O.P. Meena-DR
Hearing: 23/11/2015

Per Joginder Singh (Judicial Member) The assessee as well as the Revenue is in cross appeals against the impugned order dated 28/02/2013 of the Ld. first Appellate Authority, Mumbai.

2.

During hearing of this appeal, Dr. K. Shivaram, ld. counsel for the assessee filed additional evidence which goes to the root of the issue involved. It was contended that due to unavoidable circumstances, the assessee could not furnished the additional evidence before the ld. Assessing Officer/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The ld. DR, contended that if the additional evidence is admitted, the Department will not be in a position to examine the correctness of the claim of the assessee filed through additional evidence.

1.

2.1. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. In view of the factual matrix we admit the additional evidence filed by the assessee, however, keeping in view, the principle of natural justice, we remand the additional evidence to the file of the ld. Assessing Officer to examine the claim of the assessee and after providing due opportunity of being heard decide in accordance with law. Thus, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

3 Shri Parina A Shah & 3266/Mum/2013 2.2. So far as, the cross appeal of the Revenue (ITA No.3266/Mum/2013), is concerned, since, the part relief given to the assessee is also borne out of the same facts, therefore, in all fairness, we remand the appeal of the Revenue also to the file of the ld. Assessing Officer, who is to examine the claim of the assessee afresh and decide in accordance with law.

Finally, the appeal of the assessee as well as of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes.

This Order was pronounced in the open court in the presence of ld. representatives from both sides at the conclusion of the hearing on 16/11/2015.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →