9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 1584X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d CIT (A) as manifests from assessment order as well as from appellate order. Therefore, the assessee urged before us to admit the same in exercise the powers under Rules 29 to 31 of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963, as the omission to furnish these additional evidence in form of account ledger account, bank account statement, copy of bills of plaster, colour and flooring of shed and bills raised by contractor was neither willful nor unreasonable. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and law, we are of the view that these additional evidences filed under Rules 28 to 31 of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules 1963, before the Tribunal by the assessee are necessary for proper appreciation of the issue under appeal an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red by labour contractor Shri Rameshbhai Nishad proprietor of B. Shah Co for which payment of ₹ 1,50,000 was made by cheque No. 506224 dtd. 13.07.207 and ₹ 1,05,000 by cheque no. 506229 dtd. 19.09.2007. 4. Per contra, the ld. Sr. D.R. vehemently supported the order of the AO and CIT (A). 5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record. We find that the assessee had filed additional evidence in support of his claim that the expenditure on colour, plaster and flooring of shed was incurred by labour contractor Shri Rameshbhai Nishad proprietor of B. Shah Co for which payment on account of plaster, clear and flooring of ₹ 1,50,000 was made by cheque No. 506224 dtd. 13.07.2007 and &# ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peal and it need not to be a suo moto action of the Tribunal. The aforesaid rule is made enabling the Tribunal to admit the additional evidence in its discretion if the Tribunal holds the view that such additional evidence would be necessary to do substantial justice in the matter. It is well settled that the procedure is handmade of justice and justice should not be allowed to be choked only because of some inadvertent error or omission on the part of one of the parties to lead evidence at the appropriate stage. Once it is found that the party intending to lead evidence before the Tribunal for the first time was prevented by sufficient cause to lead such an evidence and that this evidence would have material bearing on the issue which need ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
