TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 568X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The Appellant : Shri Vineet Krishan For The Respondent : Shri S.K. Mittal, DR ORDER PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, A.M. : This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Chandigarh dated 24.2.2015 for assessment year 2010-11. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal : 1. That the order passed under section 250(6) by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Chandigarh in Appeal No.396/12-13 dated 24.02.2015 is contrary to law and facts of the case. 2. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) gravelly erred in upholding the action of the Id. Assessing Officer in disallowing the benefit to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fficer asked him to produce copy of agreement to sell and copy of conveyance deed/sale deed, vide which the property was sold by him alongwith other corroborative evidences, but the assessee could not produce any document to support his claim and so the Assessing Officer disallowed the deduction claimed under section 54 of the Act. 5. Aggrieved by the same the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT (Appeals). During the course of hearing before the Ld. CIT (Appeals), the assessee submitted additional evidence being the agreement to sell the impugned property dated 3.2.2010 and drew attention to clause-C of the agreement which stated that the seller had delivered the actual physical and vacant possession of the said house to the purc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he owner of only one residential house as on the date of sale of original asset, for the purpose of claiming deduction there-under and, therefore, accordingly, confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer in this regard. 6. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee has come up in appeal before us raising grounds against the denial of admission of additional evidence filed before the Ld. CIT (Appeals) as also the denial of deduction under section 54F of the Act. During the course of hearing before us, the assessee filed an application for admission of additional evidence under Rule 29 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules submitting the following documents as additional evidence : Sr.No. Particulars 1) Copy of Agreement to sell dated 03.02.2010 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d his objection to the admission of additional evidence in writing which is reproduced hereunder: In this case, the assesse has made an application for admission of additional evidence under Rule 29. In this regard, it is submitted that the application so filed by the assesse may kindly be out-rightly rejected as the opening words in the Rule clearly provide that 'the parties to the appeal shall not be entitled to produce additional evidence either oral or documentary before the Tribunal'. It has further been written in the Rule that 'but if the Tribunal requires any document to be produced ' Thus it is very clear that the assesse can not suo motto furnish any additional evidence. It is only when the Tribunal requires, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d before us are ital to prove the claim of the assessee of deduction under section 54F of the Act. The I.T.A.T. Delhi Bench in the case of Mahavir Prasad Gupta (supra) has while elucidating on the power of the Tribunal in term of Rule 29 to admit fresh evidence, held that it entails an element of discretion which is required to be exercised in a judicious manner and is to be exercised not only in situation where evidence could not be produced before the lower authorities owing to lack of adequate opportunity but also situations where the fresh evidence would enable the Tribunal to pass order or for any other substantial cause. Further, the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Mukta Metal Works (supra) has also held that the additional e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y and will hand over all the documents of said house to the said purchasers for their records at the time of final execution of this sale agreement. The said purchasers have become the absolute owners of said house subject to payments to be made by them. 12. The learned counsel for the assessee further stated that the agreement to sell entered into on 16.10.2010 could not be treated as the date of transfer since the possession stood transferred on the date of agreement to sale itself. The learned counsel for the assessee relied upon the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Smt.Shashi Gupta Vs. ITO in ITA No.609/Del/2012 dated 24.11.2015 in this regard. The learned counsel for the assessee pointed out that in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
