9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 1380X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... merated in Rule 46(A)(3) of the Income Tax Rules 1962. Since the second ground of appeal has to be adjudicated afresh based on the additional evidence before the Ld. CIT(A), it becomes infructuous. The matter is remanded back to the Ld. CIT(A) with the above observation. Appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. - I.T.A. No. 1824/Mum/2020 - - - Dated:- 15-3-2022 - SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, AM AND Ms. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM For the Appellant : Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, Ld. AR For the Respondent : Shri Prabhat Kumar Gupta, Ld. DR ORDER Per Kavitha Rajagopal, Judicial Member: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee for the Assessment Year (AY) 2014-15 as against the impugned order of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... also buying and selling of land, FSI in area surrounding Virar and Nalasopara. Following a search and seizure action u/s 132 of the Act in MAAD Group of companies on 31.07.2014, the assessee‟s residential premise was also subjected to search. The assessee filed the return of income subsequent to notice issued u/s 153A for the relevant assessment year and declared Rs. 84,53,689/- as total income excluding declaration made on account of cash found. After the completion of the assessment by the AO u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A, the total income was determined to the tune of Rs. 2,54,47,115/- as against the returned income of Rs. 1,65,47,850/- which was on the basis of seized documents from the office of MAAD Realtors and Infra Ltd, indicating ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... egard to adducing additional evidence before Ld. CIT(A). 5. The Ld. DR on the other hand, contends that the assessee has not filed any affidavit stating that he has misunderstood the provision of Section 2(22)(e) of the Act and insisted the Ld. AR to file an affidavit for the same. The Ld. AR in reply to this, stated that it has been taken up before the AO and is thus reflected in para 7.4 of AO‟s order. The Ld. AR prayed that the matter be remanded back to Ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration with the direction to permit the assessee to adduce the specified additional documentary evidence. 6. We have considered the rival submission and perused the material placed on record. Before adjudicating the ground of appeal, it is pertinen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther share holder /director Shri Mukesh Sonar. This was further reduced by the Ld. CIT(A) to the extent of Rs. 39,23,000/- as the actual payment by M/s MAAD Realtors Infra Ltd. to M/s D. M. Logistics Pvt. Ltd. during the previous year relevant to AY 2014-15 and on addition of 50% of the said amount was added by the Ld. CIT(A) to the tune of Rs. 19,61,500/- with the direction to reopen the earlier assessment years to account the balance amount determined by the AO. The assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) contended that he had misinterpreted the provision of section 2(22)(e) and had sought for an opportunity to produce additional evidence to substantiate his claim which was mentioned as a business transaction between both the companies and the i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... om), a new dimension to the provision relating to admission of additional evidence before Ld. CIT(A) was considered. The Hon‟ble Bombay High Court rejected the contention of Ld. CIT(A) and held that under section 250(4), the Ld. CIT(A) was empowered to make such further inquiry as he thinks fit and such power being quasi judicial power, it was incumbent on him to exercise the same if the facts and circumstances justify. 9. In Smt. Mohindar Kaur Vs Central Govt. (1976) 104 ITR 120‟, Section 250(5) confers power upon Ld. CIT(A) to permit the appellant to raise a fresh point which has not been even touched by rule 46A. The Court finally held that Rule 46A is not ultra virus section 250 or 251 of the Act. On the contrary, it gi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
