9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 1081X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are of considered view, that CIT(A) has fallen in error in not admitting the additional evidence and the additional grounds by relying on the decision of Goetze (India) Ltd. [ 2006 (3) TMI 75 - SUPREME COURT] - There is no justification to deny the additional ground and additional evidences for mere failure to take the same before the AO. The settled proposition of law being that powers of CIT(A) are co-terminus to AO - There is no prohibition under law that as CIT(A) cannot accept additional claim without assessee revising the return. Accordingly, we considered it to be an appropriate case to allow the appeal for statistical purposes only. - SHRI G. S. PANNU, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Assessee by Non ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee preferred appeal before CIT(A) with the grounds that the assessment order was without complying with the mandatory conditions u/s 147 to 151 as envisaged under the Income Tax. The Income Tax Officer erred in facts and law in completing assessment u/s 144/147 of the I.T. Act while issuing notice u/ 148 which was never served on the assessee. Assessment Order was against law. The Income Tax Officer erred in calculating entire sale consideration as short term capital gain on the sale of ancestral agricultural land without allowing statutory deductions/exemptions. 6. The appellant assessee preferred written submission dated 16/01/2019 and 23/09/2021 inter alia mentioning that Assessing Officer assumed jurisdiction u/s 147 and reopened ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ime of sale was not a capital assets and that otherwise the sale consideration was invested in accordance with provisions of section 54F was rejected for the reason that the same were not placed before the Assessing Officer. At the same time CIT(A) has directed the Assessing Officer to compute the capital gain after giving benefit of costs of acquisition/index costs of acquisition. We are of considered view that same certainly would require taking into consideration the evidences which were filed as additional evidences by invoking provisions of Rule 46A. We are of considered view, that CIT(A) has fallen in error in not admitting the additional evidence and the additional grounds by relying on the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court judgm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
