Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (3) TMI 960 - ITAT DELHIRejection of the application for admission of additional evidence under Rule 46A - Held that:- Assessee was prevented by sufficient cause in filing details, records and books of accounts before the Assessing Officer which was submitted before the Commissioner of Income Tax(A) during the first appellate proceedings with an application under Rule 46A of the Rules but the same was rejected by the Commissioner of Income Tax(A) on wrong premise - Commissioner of Income Tax(A) misunderstood the ratio of these decisions and we respectfully hold that the ratio of this decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs Subbu Shashank (2010 (8) TMI 70 - MADRAS HIGH COURT) is squarely applicable to the facts of the present case in favour of the assessee on the issue of admissibility of additional evidence under Rule 46A of the Rules. - Assessing Officer did not provide an opportunity of hearing for the assessee and the assessee was prevented by sufficient and reasonable cause from filing relevant details, books and other record before the Assessing Officer to support its claim of expenses and other deduction. At the same time, we also hold that the Commissioner of Income Tax(A) rejected the application of the assessee filed under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules on unjustified and incorrect grounds and observations and findings of Commissioner of Income Tax(A) in this regard are set aside. - Matter remanded back - Decided in favour of assessee.
|