9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 1074X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssed the appeal of the assessee by not admitting the documents submitted by the assessee which in our view, is not correct. Even the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition Vs Mst. Katiji [ 1987 (2) TMI 61 - SUPREME COURT] had categorically held that technical considerations are pitted against the cause of substantial justice it is the cause of substantial justice that must prevail. Therefore, in view of the above proposition as laid down by the Hon ble Supreme Court and also keeping in view the principles laid down in the decisions in the cases of CIT v. Virgin Securities and Credits P. Ltd [ 2011 (2) TMI 207 - DELHI HIGH COURT] . We allow both these grounds of appeal raised by the assessee and admit the do ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the BOB account. 5. The ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the additions made by the A.O. by not passing a speaking order on the ground of appeal filed before him. 6. The appellant prays you honors indulgence to add, amend or alter all or any of the grounds of the appeal on or before the date of hearing. 2. The hearing of the appeal was concluded through video conference in view of the prevailing situation of Covid-19 Pandemic. 3. Brief facts of the case are that on the basis of AIR information, the assessee deposited cash of ₹ 46,27,571/- in his saving bank account maintained with ICICI bank Ltd. Further as per 26AS details, the assessee received ₹ 6,57,945/- from various companies on which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed before the ld. CIT(A) and also relied upon the written submissions filed before the Bench and the same is reproduced below: 1.1 The appellant very humbly submits that during the assessment proceedings, the assessee had certain dispute with his AR Shri Vijay Soni, regarding charging of fee. The AR had all the details called for by the AO with him, but he did not present the same before the AO. He also refused to give NOC so as to enable the appellant to appoint another AR to represent his case. When the AR did not comply to the notices, finally the appellant had to take charge. He submitted whatever facts were within his knowledge. The Ld.AO finding them insufficient, made the additions. 1.2 At the time of first appeal, POA to r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the appellant. 1.6 The Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal holding that during the assessment proceedings, the appellant had failed to explain the nature and source of cash deposited in the bank account and no justification for admitting the additional evidence under Rule 46A has been filed during the appellate proceedings. 1.7 The action of the Ld.CIT(A) is against the Principles of natural justice. When the additional evidence was produced before the CIT(A), he accepted it without any objection and in furtherance of his action of having accepted the same, he forwarded it to the AO for remand report. This clearly shows his intention that he had accepted the additional evidence and had no reservations about it. If he had any object ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orting documents and therefore, in absence of those supporting documents, added these amounts in the total income of the assessee. During the pendency of the appeal before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee filed an application under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules for admitting the documents in the shape of ICICI bank account summary for the period, bank of Baroda account summary for the period, account confirmation of party M/s Faridabad Assam Roadways, Faridabad with PAN card copy, account confirmation of party M/s Bhamra Road Lines, Delhi with PAN card copy, account confirmation of party M/s New Saini Coargo Carier, Faridabad with PAN card copy, account confirmation of party M/s Allied Transport Co. P. Ltd. Delhi with PAN card copy, account ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e before the A.O. as the said details were handed over to the assessee by his authorized representative. Even the said authorized representative had also refused to give NOC to enable the assessee to appoint another authorized representative to represent his case. Although, before the ld. CIT(A), all those documents as mentioned above had been placed on record by the assessee and the ld. CIT(A) had accepted without any objection and in furtherance of his action of having accepted the same, he forwarded it to the A.O. for seeking his remand report. This act of the ld. CIT(A) shown his intention that he had accepted the additional evidences and had no reservations about it but in absence of remand report submitted by the A.O., the ld. CIT(A) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
