2013 (12) TMI 473 - AT - Income Tax

Violation of Rule 46A The assessee has filed additional evidence before CIT Held that - The CIT(A) accepted the additional evidence without any enquiry and without giving any reasonable opportunity to the assessing officer to examine the evidence or document or to cross examine the witness produced by the appellant - , the Commissioner of Income-tax(A) has granted entire relief only on the basis of the additional material filed by the taxpayers There was a gross violation of Rule 46A The order was set aside for fresh decision.

Summary

Issues:
1. Violation of Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 in accepting additional evidence without giving the assessing officer an opportunity to examine it.
2. Whether the Commissioner of Income-tax(A) granted relief solely based on additional material filed by the taxpayers.
3. Remitting the issues back to the assessing officer for reconsideration after setting aside lower authorities' orders.

Analysis:
1. The judgment addresses the violation of Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, concerning the acceptance of additional evidence without providing the assessing officer with an opportunity to examine it. The ld.DR argued that the Commissioner of Income-tax(A) accepted the taxpayer's additional evidence without following due process, leading to the allowance of the taxpayer's claim solely based on this material. The Tribunal emphasized that Rule 46A(3) mandates the assessing officer be given a reasonable opportunity to examine such evidence. It was noted that merely providing an opportunity in the appeal does not meet the rule's requirements, and the Commissioner should have allowed the assessing officer to scrutinize the documents submitted as additional evidence.

2. The judgment delves into whether the Commissioner of Income-tax(A) granted relief solely based on the additional material filed by the taxpayers. The ld.counsel for the taxpayer contended that while the assessing officer was given an opportunity in the appeals, no specific opportunity was provided to examine the additional evidence. The Tribunal highlighted the importance of Rule 46A(3) in ensuring a fair process, emphasizing that the assessing officer must have the chance to review any additional evidence presented. It was observed that the Commissioner's decision heavily relied on the additional material, indicating a violation of Rule 46A.

3. The judgment concludes by addressing the course of action to remedy the violations identified. The Tribunal set aside the lower authorities' orders and remitted all issues raised by the revenue in the appeals back to the assessing officer for reconsideration. The assessing officer was directed to re-examine the matters, taking into account both the additional evidence filed before the Commissioner of Income-tax(A) and any further material submitted during fresh assessment proceedings. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of providing the taxpayer with a fair opportunity to be heard in the process. Ultimately, all appeals of the revenue were allowed for statistical purposes, signaling a decision in favor of remitting the issues back for proper reconsideration.