9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (7) TMI 1148X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. K.M. Parikh, learned counsel appearing for the respondent, the appeal is herewith admitted. With the consent of learned counsels for both the parties, it is taken up for final hearing today itself. 2. In the facts of the case, the following substantial question of law is formulated for consideration and determination : Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal committed a substantial error in upholding the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in not permitting the assessee to produce the additional evidence? 2.1. The relevant facts may be gathered first. The assesse-company was engaged in manufacturing of note-books, exe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... selves. The CIT(A) did not accept those letters and dismissed the appeal confirming the order of the Assessing Officer. The appellate Commissioner took a view that since the parties were not close relatives of the appellant and that the amount of loan being substantial, they ought to have signed an agreement. According to him, in absence of such supporting document, the creditworthiness of the said two parties was not proved. 2.4 The production of additional evidence-the confirmation letters was permissible in terms of Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'). But the CIT(A) rejected the request by making one line observation in his order that Moreover, since these additional documentary ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the conditions of Rule 46-A of the Rules for producing the additional evidence were satisfied and the CIT(A) ought to have permitted the assessee to produce the said additional evidence. 3.1 On the other hand, learned advocate for the respondentdepartment submitted that the CIT(A) was right in not permitting the additional evidence. It was submitted that the provision of Rule 46A can come to the aid of assessee, provided only the conditions thereof are satisfied. 4. Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rule, 1962 provides for production of additional evidence before the Dy. Commissioner (Appeals) and the Commissioner (Appeals). It is reproduced as under : 46A. (1) The appellant shall not be entitled to produce before the Deputy Com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dditional evidence produced by the appellant. (4) Nothing contained in this rule shall affect the power of the the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) or, as the case may be, the Commissioner (Appeals) to direct the production of any document, or the examination of any witness, to enable him to dispose of the appeal, or for any other substantial cause including the enhancement of the assessment or penalty (whether on his own motion or on the request of the Assessing Officer) under clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 251 or the imposition of penalty under section 271. 4.1 Under the above Rule, an appellant may produce oral or documentary evidence other than the evidence produced by him during the course of proceedings before the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee were by way of bank drafts through NRO/NRE account of the parties with the City Bank. 5. Rule 46A permitting additional evidence at the appellate stage before the Commissioner is essentially a rule of procedure. The grant of permission to produce the additional evidence thereunder is on the conditions mentioned therein. The rule should receive a liberal interpretation with an object that the assessee is not deprived of opportunity to produce evidence in support of his case which he wanted to produce at the initial stage, but was prevented for good reason. 5.1 In the facts of the present case, the approach of CIT(A) as well as of the Tribunal with regard to applying Rule 46A was wooden. As noted above, the factum of confirmati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
