CIT v. Text Hundred India Pvt. Ltd.

351 ITR 57High Court2013#1283 most cited

What is CIT v. Text Hundred India Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

The Tribunal has the discretion to admit additional evidence, even if filed by a party, when it deems it necessary for proper adjudication and to achieve substantial justice. This power can be exercised in the interest of justice.

88

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Text Hundred India Pvt. Ltd. · 351 ITR 57 · admission of additional evidence · ITAT Rule 29 · discretion of Tribunal · interest of justice · substantial justice · proper adjudication · appellate authority power to admit evidence · additional evidence CIT(A)

Sections most often in play

Section 153CSection 143(3)Section 153ASection 132Section 147Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 131(1A)

Issues it is cited on

retraction of statementsection 158bb(1)section 131(1a)section 158bbadmission of additional evidencesection 153c(1)section 34section 292bblock periodloose paperssection 132(1)section 153b

Judgments citing CIT v. Text Hundred India Pvt. Ltd.

Mr. Paul Plathotathil John, Coorg vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 844/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

…e present additional evidences before the AO or CIT(A) were not willful nor intentional. In this regard the appellant respectfully relies upon the ratio of the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case CIT v. Text Hundred India Put. Ltd., (2013) 351 ITR 57 wherein at Para-13 of the Judgment, it was held that Rule 29 enables the Tribunal to admit any additional evidence which would be necessary to do substantial justice in the matter. Their Lordships further observed that the various procedures, including that relating to filing of additional evidence, is a handmade of justice and justice should not…

M/S. Paul Resorts & Hotels Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Bangalore

ITA 843/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…e present additional evidences before the AO or CIT(A) were not willful nor intentional. In this regard the appellant respectfully relies upon the ratio of the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case CIT v. Text Hundred India Pvt. Ltd., (2013) 351 ITR 57 wherein at Para-13 of the Judgment, it was held that Rule 29 enables the Tribunal to admit any additional evidence which would be necessary to do substantial justice in the matter. Their Lordships further observed that the various procedures, including that relating to filing of additional evidence, is a handmade of justice and justice should not…

M/S. Paul Resorts & Hotels Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax. Central Circle-1(1), Bangalore

ITA 842/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…e present additional evidences before the AO or CIT(A) were not willful nor intentional. In this regard the appellant respectfully relies upon the ratio of the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case CIT v. Text Hundred India Pvt. Ltd., (2013) 351 ITR 57 wherein at Para-13 of the Judgment, it was held that Rule 29 enables the Tribunal to admit any additional evidence which would be necessary to do substantial justice in the matter. Their Lordships further observed that the various procedures, including that relating to filing of additional evidence, is a handmade of justice and justice should not…

M/S. Paul Resorts & Hotels Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 841/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…e present additional evidences before the AO or CIT(A) were not willful nor intentional. In this regard the appellant respectfully relies upon the ratio of the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case CIT v. Text Hundred India Pvt. Ltd., (2013) 351 ITR 57 wherein at Para-13 of the Judgment, it was held that Rule 29 enables the Tribunal to admit any additional evidence which would be necessary to do substantial justice in the matter. Their Lordships further observed that the various procedures, including that relating to filing of additional evidence, is a handmade of justice and justice should not…

M/S. Paul Resorts & Hotels Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 840/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…e present additional evidences before the AO or CIT(A) were not willful nor intentional. In this regard the appellant respectfully relies upon the ratio of the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case CIT v. Text Hundred India Pvt. Ltd., (2013) 351 ITR 57 wherein at Para-13 of the Judgment, it was held that Rule 29 enables the Tribunal to admit any additional evidence which would be necessary to do substantial justice in the matter. Their Lordships further observed that the various procedures, including that relating to filing of additional evidence, is a handmade of justice and justice should not…

M/S. Paul Resorts & Hotels Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 839/BANG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…e present additional evidences before the AO or CIT(A) were not willful nor intentional. In this regard the appellant respectfully relies upon the ratio of the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case CIT v. Text Hundred India Pvt. Ltd., (2013) 351 ITR 57 wherein at Para-13 of the Judgment, it was held that Rule 29 enables the Tribunal to admit any additional evidence which would be necessary to do substantial justice in the matter. Their Lordships further observed that the various procedures, including that relating to filing of additional evidence, is a handmade of justice and justice should not…

M/S. Paul Resorts & Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 838/BANG/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…e present additional evidences before the AO or CIT(A) were not willful nor intentional. In this regard the appellant respectfully relies upon the ratio of the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case CIT v. Text Hundred India Pvt. Ltd., (2013) 351 ITR 57 wherein at Para-13 of the Judgment, it was held that Rule 29 enables the Tribunal to admit any additional evidence which would be necessary to do substantial justice in the matter. Their Lordships further observed that the various procedures, including that relating to filing of additional evidence, is a handmade of justice and justice should not…

Luminous Teleinfra Ltd. (Now Merged With Luminous Power Technologies Pvt. Ltd.), New Delhi vs. Addl.CIT, Special Range- 05, New Delhi

In the result, the application of the assessee for limited purpose

ITA 6997/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Delhi31 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Jha, CIT-DR
Section 80

…ng High Court cases: i) CIT v. Kum. Satya Setia, [1983] 15 Taxman 345 (MP) ii) Anaikar Trades &Estates (P). Ltd v. CIT, [1991] 56 Taxman 170 (Mad) iii) R.S.S. Shanmugam Pillai & Sons v . CIT, [1974] 95 ITR 109 (Mad.) iv) CIT Vs Text Hundred India Pvt Ltd 351 ITR 57 (Del) 6. The ld. counsel for the assessee argued that the segmental financial statement produced as additional evidence along with the present application is necessary and pertinent for adjudication of the issue of production of ordinary profits u/s 80-IA(10) of the Act from sale of goods through tax holiday unit to LPTPL. The segmental financi…

Luminous Power Technologies Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Special Range- 05, New Delhi

In the result, the application of the assessee for limited purpose

ITA 6996/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: FixedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Jha, CIT-DR
Section 40A(2)

…owing High Court cases: i) CIT v. Kum. Satya Setia, [1983] 15 Taxman 345 (MP) ii) Anaikar Trades &Estates (P). Ltd v. CIT, [1991] 56 Taxman 170 (Mad) iii) R.S.S. Shanmugam Pillai & Sons v . CIT, [1974] 95 ITR 109 (Mad.) iv) CIT Vs Text Hundred India Pvt Ltd 351 ITR 57 (Del) 6. The ld. counsel for the assessee argued that the segmental financial statement produced as additional evidence along with the present application is necessary and pertinent for adjudication as the internal TNMM method followed by the assessee was rejected merely on the ground that since the segmental financial statement was not audited…

Kailash Chandra Sharma, Chotiyo Ki Dhani, Niwaru vs. Assessing Officer Ward 3 (1), ITO WD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 589/JPR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Dec 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Gorav Sharma (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT)
Section 144

…r submitted that all the judicial institution - the Hon'able ITAT being one of them are respected not on account of its power to legalize injustice on technical grounds but because these are capable of removing injustice. 4. CIT vs. Text Hundred India (p) ltd 351 ITR 57(del) the additional evidence could be admitted in the interest of justice. 6 Kailash Chandra Sharma vs. ITO 5. The following Additional evidence should be admitted which is root and basis of this case:- a. copy of allotment of land, receipt of payment, side plan from sindhi co-operative housing society limited. b. Agreement with Shri Rameshwar K…

Girdhari Lal Meena, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 118/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Gogra (C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT) a
Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144(1)

…assessee to drive home to the contentions so raised has relied upon the following decisions:-  Rajendra Pathak v. Asstt. DIT (2015) 173 TTJ 68 (Jp. Trib) 18 Girdhari Lal Meena vs. ITO  Commissioner of Income-tax-iv v. Text Hundred India (P.) Ltd. (2013) 351 ITR 57 (Hel-HC)  National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 383 (SC)  Ajay Goyal vs. ITO (2006) 099 TTJ 0164 (Jodh-Trib)  CIT v. Gotan Lime Khanij Udhyog (2002) 256 ITR 243 ( Raj- HC)  ACIT vs. Sandesh Kumar Jain ITA No. 41/JAB/2020 dated 31.10.2022(Jabalpur-Trib) 5.4 The Bench directed the ld. AR to file the summary of the cash position…

Manish Sharma, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT Circle-I, Ghaziabad

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

ITA 5522/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year 2015-16 Manish Sharma, Vs. Dcit 510, Circle-1, Patrakar Parishar Apartment, Ghaziabad Sec-05, Vasundhra, Ghaziabad Uttar Pradesh. Pan Ateps8104J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sankalp, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Jyoti Verma, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 68

…. AR that the above additional evidence go to the root of the matter and are necessary for effective adjudication of the appeal. He relied on judicial precedents including the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Text Hundred India Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 351 ITR 57 (Del). The Ld. AR urged that the matter may be remanded back to the Ld. AO for decision afresh. The Ld. DR had no objection thereto. 8. We have perused the orders of the Ld. AO/CIT(A), we are of the view that it is essential in the interest of justice and fair play to consider the submissions of the assessee made before the Ld. CIT(A) in the ligh…

M/S Kerala Automobiles Ltd, Trivandrum vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Trivandrum

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 176/COCH/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin10 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountantmemberand Shri Manomohan Das, Judicialmember Kerala Automobiles Ltd. Asst. Cit, Aralumoodu P.O., Neyattinkara Circle 1(1), Vs. Trivandurm 695123 Trivandrum [Pan:Aabck0142M] (Respondent) (Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri Anand George Thomas, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sajit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 115Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 251Section 68

…is power u/r. 46A(4), calling for material from the assessee to substantiate it’s claims before him. Reference in this regard may be made to, inter alia, decisions in Prabhavati S. Shah v. CIT [1998] 231 ITR 1 (Bom); CIT v. Text Hundred India Pvt. Ltd. [2013] 351 ITR 57 (Del);Velji Deoraj& Co. v. CIT [1968] 68 ITR 708 (Bom), to cite some; the case law in the matter being legion. Even as the latter two decisions are in relation to the power of the Tribunal u/r. 29 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, the same is in paramateria with r. 46A(4).His order, rather than rubbishing the assessment order for a gross abuse of t…

Manish Govind Dangi, Udiapur vs. ACIT, Circle (Intl.Tax), Jaipur

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 118/JPR/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Aug 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Soni (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT)
Section 194Section 194ISection 201Section 201(1)Section 250

…eciated and consequently substantial injustice is likely to take place against the Applicant. 8. In support to above contention, reliance has been placed on the following various judgment by various Hon’ble Courts: CIT v. Text Hundred India (P.) Ltd. [2011] 351 ITR 57 (Delhi) In view of several decisions, a discretion lies with the Tribunal to admit additional evidence in the interest of justice, once the Tribunal affirms opinion that doing so would be necessary for proper adjudication of the matter and this can be done even when application is filed by one of parties to appeal and it need not to be a suo motu…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1(1), Jabalpur vs. Shri Sandesh Kumar Jain, Jabalpur

In the result, the Revenue‟s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 41/JAB/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur27 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon‟Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Respondent: Shri Rahul Bardia, FCA
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(3)Section 28Section 68Section 69Section 69B

…y not a part of the disclosure? Further, if so, which is understandably the purport of the submissions before us, why were the same not furnished earlier and being only now, and in a piecemeal manner. As explained in CIT v. Text Hundred India Pvt. Ltd. [2013] 351 ITR 57 (Del) with reference to judicial precedents, where some inherent lacunae or defect becomes apparent to the appellate court, coming in the way of pronouncing the judgment, it held, the expression „to enable it to pronounce the judgment‟ can be invoked (also see Velji Deoraj & Co. v. CIT [1968] 68 ITR 708 (Bom)). We find none such, nor was any expla…

Mr. Ranganna Ramanath, Bangalore vs. Office of the Income Tax Office, Ward- 3(2)(4), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 103/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jan 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Sri.Narendra Kumar Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 143(3)

…the above 7 Sri.Ranganna Ramanath. principle enunciated by the Hon’ble Apex Court, lapse in filing formal petition before the CIT(A) ought to have been condoned. 9.2 The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Text Hundred India (P.) Ltd. reported in 351 ITR 57 (Del.), has held as under: “In view of several decisions, a discretion lies with the Tribunal to admit additional evidence in the interest of justice, once the Tribunal affirms opinion that doing so would be necessary for proper adjudication of the matter and this can be done even when application is filed by one of parties to appeal and it need…

Adonis Infrastructure Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 1(3), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 4455/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Nov 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A. No. 4455/Del/2019 (A.Y 2010-11) (Through Video Conferencing) Vs Ito M/S Adonis Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Ward-1(3) D-16, Kamla Nagar New Delhi New Delhi-110007 (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…ds of Smt. Sumita Pandey. Therefore, the Ld. AR submitted that these additional evidence be admitted under Rule 29 of the Income Tax Rules 1962. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT(A) Vs. Text 100 India Pvt. Ltd. 351 ITR 57. 6. The Ld. DR relied upon the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A). The Ld. DR submitted that the additional evidence should not be admitted at this juncture. As regards the legal issue, the Ld. DR submitted that the reasons were properly recorded and satisfaction was given. Therefore, the reopening is valid. 7. We have heard both the pa…

Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT Circle 12 (1)

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4261/DEL/2006[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Oct 2020AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2003-04

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Sunita Singh, CIT, DR

…es should have been admitted. For the above proposition, he relied on the various decisions including the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Virgin Securities & Credit (P) Ltd., 332 ITR 396 and CIT vs. Text Hundred India (P) Ltd., 351 ITR 57 (Del). He submitted that once the CIT(A) sought a remand report from the AO qua the additional evidence, the same should have been admitted. For the above proposition, he relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Inderpal Chawla, ITA No.1424/2010 and the decision of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the…

Sanjay Tyagi, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 6874/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Sainidr. B. R. R. Kumar(E-Court Module) Ita No. 6864/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 6865/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 6866/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 6867/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 6868/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 6869/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 6870/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 6871/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 6872/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 6873/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 6874/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Shri Sanjay Tyagi, Vs Deputy Commissioner Of C/O- Shri Sankalp Anil Sharma, Adv. Income Tax, Central C-4/129, 1St Floor, Safdarjung Circle-1, Development Area, New Delhi New Delhi-110016 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aeipt1282R Assessee By : Sh. Rajiv Saxena, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. H.K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.09.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.09.2020

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Saxena, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. H.K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 131Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

…e the issue before it, Tribunal has vide discretion to admit the additional evidence. 45. The ld. AR placed reliance on the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Text Hundred India (P.) Ltd. reported in [2013] 351 ITR 57 (Delhi), wherein Hon’ble High Court has held as under: “13. The aforesaid case law clearly lays down a neat principle of law that discretion lies with the Tribunal to admit additional evidence in the interest of justice once the ITA Nos. 6864 to 6874/Del/2017 16 Sanjay Tyagi Tribunal affirms the opinion that doing so would be necessary for prope…

Sanjay Tyagi, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 6873/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Sainidr. B. R. R. Kumar(E-Court Module) Ita No. 6864/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 6865/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 6866/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 6867/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 6868/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 6869/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 6870/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 6871/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 6872/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 6873/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 6874/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Shri Sanjay Tyagi, Vs Deputy Commissioner Of C/O- Shri Sankalp Anil Sharma, Adv. Income Tax, Central C-4/129, 1St Floor, Safdarjung Circle-1, Development Area, New Delhi New Delhi-110016 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aeipt1282R Assessee By : Sh. Rajiv Saxena, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. H.K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.09.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.09.2020

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Saxena, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. H.K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 131Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

…e the issue before it, Tribunal has vide discretion to admit the additional evidence. 45. The ld. AR placed reliance on the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Text Hundred India (P.) Ltd. reported in [2013] 351 ITR 57 (Delhi), wherein Hon’ble High Court has held as under: “13. The aforesaid case law clearly lays down a neat principle of law that discretion lies with the Tribunal to admit additional evidence in the interest of justice once the ITA Nos. 6864 to 6874/Del/2017 16 Sanjay Tyagi Tribunal affirms the opinion that doing so would be necessary for prope…