TMI Blog2021 (6) TMI 494X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d regulations. when the documents were submitted for the first time before the CIT (A) the provisions of Rule 46A shall equally applicable. Accordingly, we find that there is a violation of Rule 46A as the A.O. was not provided an opportunity to verify and examine the evidences filed by the assessee in the appellate proceedings. The CIT (A) could have called for the remand report on the evidences filed by the assessee as referred at para 5 of the CIT (A) order but allowed the assessee appeal. Therefore, for limited purpose we find that the documents which the Ld. CIT (A) has relied are to be examined and verified by the Assessing officer. We set-aside the order of the CIT (A) and restore this disputed issue to the file of the assessing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ld. CIT (A) on the above ground be reversed and that of the Assessing Officer be restored. 4. The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any grounds or add a new ground which may be necessary. 2. The Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Non Resident Indian (NRI) from the year 1994-99 and has brought FCNR deposits in US dollars and leading a retired life. The revenue has received information from NMS. cycle-1 ITD application of investigation wing, that in the F.Y. 2009-10 the assessee has invested ₹ 2,00,00,000/- in mutual funds. Therefore, the A.O. after recording the reasons for reopening has issued notice u/s. 148 of the Act. Subsequently, notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act and show cause notice was also issued ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee and show cause letter dated 31.10.2017, the assessee could not explain the sources of mutual funds investment of ₹ 2 Crores. Therefore in the absence of the information, the A.O. made addition as unexplained investment u/s. 69 of the Act and assessed the total income of ₹ 2,00,88,710/- and passed order u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated 22.11.2017. 3. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed an appeal with the CIT (A), the Ld. CIT (A) considered the grounds of appeal, findings of the AO in scrutiny assessment and the written submissions of the assessee referred at para 5 of the CIT (A) order. The CIT (A) found that in respect of investment of ₹ 1 Crore in HSBC Mutual fund the assessee was an NRI from the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (A) order. The assessee has submitted the details in the appellate proceedings and the CIT (A) has observed that these investments are supported by documentary evidence and granted the relief. Whereas, the before the A.O. no information was filed by the assessee or any comments were called for by the appellate authority on additional evidences from the A.O. therefore prayed for allowing the revenue appeal. 5. Contra, the Ld. AR supported the orders of the CIT (A) and relied on the paper book and supported his arguments with the submissions made before the CIT (A) and the documentary evidence of investments made with HSBC Mutual and Fidelity mutual fund and other bank accounts. The assessee earlier was a NRI and now is leading a retired l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e CIT (A) the provisions of Rule 46A shall equally applicable. Accordingly, we find that there is a violation of Rule 46A as the A.O. was not provided an opportunity to verify and examine the evidences filed by the assessee in the appellate proceedings. The CIT (A) could have called for the remand report on the evidences filed by the assessee as referred at para 5 of the CIT (A) order but allowed the assessee appeal. Therefore, for limited purpose we find that the documents which the Ld. CIT (A) has relied are to be examined and verified by the Assessing officer. Hence, we set-aside the order of the CIT (A) and restore this disputed issue to the file of the assessing officer with above directions and the assessee should be provided with ade ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|