9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 811X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ove that the tractor’s parts were given to the purchasers of the tractors, as a farmers kit without any charges and the same could not be added to the income of the appellant - the entire evidence has been taken into consideration by the CIT(A) - the CIT (Appeals) has not accepted the plea raised by the appellant – the finding returned is based on the facts which were before the CIT(A) – thus, there is no substantial question of law arises for consideration – Decided against Assessee. - ITA No. 268 of 2012 - - - Dated:- 10-3-2014 - Hemant Gupta And Surinder Gupta,JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr. Akshay Bhan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Alok Mittal, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Vivek Sethi, Advocate ORDER Hemant Gupt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f law? (iv)Whether in fact and circumstances of the case, the action of the authorities below, the impugned orders are legally sustainable in the eyes of law? Assessee is engaged in the sale of tractors and parts thereof. The assessee filed its return of income of Rs. 1,62,910/- on 31.10.2011. During the process of scrutiny of the the return of the assessee, it was found that no sale of spare parts of the tractors was shown to be made though the stock reflected such spares amounting to Rs. 11,12,052/-. The assessee submitted in writing that such tractor parts were supplied free of cost in line with the custom in the trade to supply spares to promote sale of tractors. It was also mentioned that delivery of such spares (farmer kits) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of these items. Under the provision of Rule 46A(1) of I.T. Rules, 1962, unless the assessee is able to show reasonable and sufficient cause as to why he did not submit the documents sought to be admitted as fresh evidence before the AO, only then can the fresh evidence be allowed to be admitted. The appellant had tried to contend that he was persuaded to make offer of surrender. There is nothing in the assessment record which suggests that the assessee tried to lead evidence of delivery of the spare parts etc. free of cost which was not accepted by the AO. On the other hand, there is evidence to show that the assessee was asked to give evidence that these items were given free of cost but the assessee was not able to lead any evidence in re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
