M/S. HUGHES NETWORK SYSTEMS INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

That the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ['CIT(A)'] erred on facts and in law in confirming disallowance of miscellaneous expenses amounting to Rs. 95,444 allegedly on the ground that the appellant has failed to furnish any details and provide any justification thereof. 2., That the CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in confirming disallowance of deduction of bad debts written off amounting to Rs.22,08,292 allegedly on the ground that the appellant has failed to provide details to confirm that such debt was taken in account while computing the income of previous year(s).

The ld. counsel of assessee submitted that in connection with ground no. 2 & 3 of assessee the appellant want to place additional documentary evidence on both the issues placed as additional evidence paper book as the assessee was prevented from filing these relevant evidences due to the reason as neither the Assessing Officer nor ld. CIT(A) asked the assessee to file more evidence to substantiate its explanation regarding both the issues neither by way of show cause notice by way of order sheet entry therefore the additional evidence may kindly be admitted for consideration.

Replying to the above the ld. Senior DR oppose to the admission of additional evidence and at the same time, in all fairness, he submitted that the Department has no serious objection if it is found just and proper to admit the additional evidence. He also added that in the event the additional evidence is admitted then the Assessing Officer may kindly be allowed to examine and verify the same.

On careful consideration of above submissions we are of the view that since neither the Assessing Officer nor ld. CIT(A) asked the assessee to further substantiate his explanation and without show causing the assessee explanation and evidence was disbelieved and discarded by the authorities below. Therefore we safely observed that the assessee was prevented from filing documentary evidence placed in paper book filed on 22.09.2023 due to sufficient reason and hence the additional evidence is admitted for consideration accordingly application of appellant is allowed.

Since above noted additional evidence was not placed before the authorities below therefore the matter is restored to the file of Assessing Officer for afresh adjudication of both the issues after taking into consideration additional evidence admitted and after allowing due opportunity of hearing to the assessee without being prejudice from the earlier findings on both the issues in the assessment as well as first appellate order.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 29.09.2023.