9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 747X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ional evidences - Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purposes. - ITA No. 1915/Kol/2016 - - - Dated:- 4-5-2018 - Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, JM And Dr. A. L. Saini, AM Appellant by : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate Respondent by :Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. CIT(DR) ORDER Per Dr. A. L. Saini The captioned appeal filed by the Assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year 2013-14, is directed against an order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Kolkata, in appeal No.09/CIT(A)-9/Cir-32/2016-17/Kol, dated 31.08.2016, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) dated 07.03.2016. 2. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncern M/s Avee Bearings are annexed herewith and collectively marked as Annexure D . The said documents may please be submitted as additional evidence as the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause to produce the same before the Assessing Officer due to the reasons mentioned hereinabove. The ld. Counsel submitted that it is abundantly clear from the appellate order that in spite of these additional evidences, the ld. CIT(A) did not send these to the file of the Assessing Officer to examine and call a remand report, thus violated the provisions of Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules. 4. On the other hand, the ld. DR for the Revenue objected that no additional evidences were submitted by the assessee. Moreover, the certificate of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case of COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MANISH BUILD WELL (P) LTD.,(2012) 204 TAXMAN 0106 ( Del-H.C), wherein it was held as follows: Since the CIT(A) himself refers to r. 46A and has also admitted that the confirmation letters adduced by the assessee before him were technically fresh evidence, it is not possible to accept the plea of the counsel for the assessee that the CIT(A), in examining the confirmation letters, was exercising his independent powers of enquiry under sub-s. (4) of s. 250. It is true that the CIT(A) as first appellate authority has coterminous powers over the sources of income constituting the subject-matter of the assessment, except the power to tackle new sources of income not considered by the AO, and can do ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dmitting the additional evidence are satisfied, the requirement that the AO should be allowed a reasonable opportunity of examining the evidence etc. can be thrown to the winds, a position which is wholly unacceptable and may result in unacceptable and unjust consequences. The fundamental rule which is valid in all branches of law, including IT law, is that the assessee should adduce the entire evidence in his possession at the earliest point of time. This ensures full, fair and detailed enquiry and verification. It is for the aforesaid reason that r. 46A starts in a negative manner by saying that an appellant before the CIT(A) shall not be entitled to produce before him any evidence, whether oral or documentary, other than the evidence add ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
