9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (7) TMI 548X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng to the quantum and penalty respectively. On 23.03.2009, a co-ordinate Bench of this Court has admitted the quantum appeal on the following substantial questions of law:- I. Whether the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has erred in law in setting aside the issue of bogus capital gains to the file of the Assessing Officer even though the entire material required for deciding the same was available on record. II. Whether the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has erred in law in admitting additional evidence on the basis of a bald statement that the said evidence goes to the root of the issue under consideration. III. Whether the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has erred in law in admitting additional evidence without cons ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e and gone through the material available on record. From the record, it appears that in the year 2008, the Tribunal has remanded the matter back to the A.O., as the fresh evidence was admitted by the Tribunal. It may be mentioned that Rule 46-A of the Income Tax Rules provides that:- 46A. [Production of additional evidence before the [Deputy Commissioner (Appeals)] [ and Commissioner (Appeals)] (1) The appellant shall not be entitled to produce before the [Deputy Commissioner (Appeals)] [or, as the case may be, the Commissioner (Appeals)], any evidence, whether oral or documentary, other than the evidence produced by him during the course of proceedings before the [Assessing Officer] except in the following circumstances, namely:- (a) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to dispose of the appeal, or for any other substantial cause including the enhancement of the assessment or penalty (whether on his own motion or on the request of the [Assessing Officer]) under clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 251 or the imposition of penalty under section 271. In view of above, we find no infirmity in both the orders passed by the Tribunal and the same are hereby sustained along with the reasons mentioned therein. Further, it may be mentioned that more than six years have already passed and certainly, by now the A.O. might have passed the fresh orders, but none of the parties was able to tell the status. For this reason also, the appeals are not sustainable and the same have lost it efficacy. In the result, bo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
