9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 1162X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... quate opportunity by the Assessing Officer. Thus we are of the view that the assessee was prevented by reasonable and sufficient cause from presenting the details, sought to be filed and admitted as additional evidence, since it had no opportunity to do so before the Assessing Officer and was not allowed to do so before the learned CIT (Appeals). We, therefore, in the interest of justice and equity, admit the additional evidence, filed by the assessee for consideration and adjudication. Decided in favour of assessee. - I.T.A. No.574/Bang/2014 - - - Dated:- 7-8-2015 - SHRI VIJAYPAL RAO AND SHRI JASON P. BOAZ,, JJ. For The Appellant : Shri C.R. Nulvi, C.A. For The Respondent : Dr.P.K. Srihari, Addl. CIT (D.R.) ORDER Per Shri Jason P. Boaz, A.M. : This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-III, Bangalore dt.24.2.2014 for Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The facts of the case, briefly, are as under :- 2.1 The assessee, a firm engaged in business as builders and developers, filed its return of income for Assessment Year 2009-10 on 31.7.2009 declaring income of ₹ 21,53,140. The case was take ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of the case, the Hon'ble CIT (Appeals) erred in sustaining the addition without appreciating evidences were produced to prove the identity, genuineness and credit worthiness of the loan creditors. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble CIT (Appeals) erred in not appreciating the evidences and documents were produced in proper prospective manner and its entirety. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble CIT (Appeals) erred in sustaining the addition made by the Assessing Officer under Section 68, though the loans were received through proper banking channel and the appellant submitted the PAN and assessing authority under whom the loan creditors were assessed. Hence, the addition being erroneous on both of the facts and law. 7. For these and other reasons, which may be adduced at the time of hearing, the appellant prays this Hon'ble Bench to delete the addition made by the Assessing Officer or may pass such other order as the Bench may think fit. 8. Appellant craves leaves to add, to alter, to amend and to delete any of the grounds during the course of hearing. 4. The Grounds at S.Nos.1, 7 8 are general in nat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... #8377; 35 lakhs. The learned Authorised Representative contends that this action on the part of the Assessing Officer, before coming to an adverse finding in the matter, was in grave violation of the principles of natural justice since the assessee was not provided due and adequate opportunity of being heard in the matter and to adduce evidence to rebut the Assessing Officer s presumption and to buttress its own case. 5.1.3 The learned Authorised Representative submitted that in appellate proceedings before the learned CIT (Appeals), the assessee had made an application dt.21.1.2014 seeking for admission of additional evidence under Rule 46A of the Rules which was rejected by the learned CIT (Appeals) on the grounds that the assessee has failed to establish reasonable cause for failure to produce this evidence in assessment proceedings and the Assessing Officer had afforded the assessee adequate opportunity to produce the evidence required. The learned Authorised Representative contends that this view of the learned CIT (Appeals) was erroneous. The record clearly indicates that while the Assessing Officer required the assessee to produce certain details, the Assessing Officer ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... b ur Rehman and Mr. Ateeq , the details called for appear to have been placed before her and also confirming that the loans were advanced by cheque to the assessee. In the case of the fourth person, namely, Sri Sawanth Shetty, the summons issued was returned unserved. It appears from the order of assessment that, on an appraisal of the material before her at this stage, the Assessing Officer was not inclined to accept the genuineness of the loans of these four persons amounting to ₹ 35 lakhs. It appears from a plain reading of the order of assessment that the Assessing Officer at this stage, instead of putting the assessee on notice by affording the assessee an opportunity of being heard and to adduce evidence to rebut the Assessing Officer s view and buttress its own stands that the aforesaid four loans were genuine, proceeded to render an adverse finding in the matter thereby violating the principles of natural justice by not affording the assessee adequate opportunity to present evidence in this regard. 5.3.2 We find that on appeal too, the learned CIT (Appeals) in the impugned order, declined to admit the additional evidence sought to be admitted by the assessee u/R 46 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
