9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 1062X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The documents which were produced before the CIT(A) were never submitted by the assessee before the Assessing Officer, which is in violation of Rule 46A – The issue was restored for fresh decision. - IT Appeal No. 1275 (Mds.) of 2011 - - - Dated:- 14-3-2013 - ABRAHAM P.GEORGE AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY , JJ. For the Appellant : Shaji P. Jacob. For the Respondent : G. Baskar. ORDER:- PER : Vikas Awasthy The appeal has been filed by the Revenue impugning the order of the CIT(A)-V, Chennai dated 11.04.2011. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income for the assessment year 2006-07 on 4.3.2008 declaring total income of Rs. 2,58,961/-. The assessee is alleged to be a Director of M/s. Mode ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Now, the Revenue has come in second appeal before the Tribunal assailing the order of the CIT(A). 4. Shri Shaji P. Jacob appearing on behalf of the Revenue submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 4,80,920/-, which the assessee has alleged to have received as gift from his mother's sister's son. As per the definition of relative given in Explanation to section 56(2)(v), mother's sister's son do not fall within the meaning of the term relative used in the section. The DR submitted that with regard to the alleged loans received from Mr. Iliaz and Mr. Sakthivel, the CIT(A) without affording any opportunity of hearing to the Assessing Officer has accepted the appeal of the assessee. In respect of cash deposits amou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ements were produced before the Assessing Officer as well as CIT(A). The Assessing Officer without considering the documentary evidence produced by the assessee made addition of Rs. 13,00,000/- in the income returned by the assessee. 6. We have heard the submissions of both the sides and have perused the orders of the authorities below. The CIT(A) has allowed gift of Rs. 4,80,920/- received from mother's sister's son on the ground that the amount has been received from the lineal ascendant or lineal descendant which means relative. The term relative has been defined in Explanation to section 56(2)(v) which is reproduced herein below:- "56(2)(v):- Explanation. For the purposes of this clause, "relative" means (i) sp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has contended that the assessee has failed to substantiate his claim with documentary evidence either during the assessment proceedings or appellate proceedings with respect to identity and genuineness of the lenders of the loan. The DR has contended that before deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer the CIT(A) has not afforded any opportunity to the Assessing Officer to defend the assessment order. The documents which were produced before the CIT(A) were never submitted by the assessee before the Assessing Officer, which is in violation of Rule 46A of the Income Tax Act. 8. In respect of these two additions deleted by CIT(A), we deem it appropriate to remit the matter back to the Assessing Officer to decide the issues afres ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
