TMI Blog1996 (10) TMI 48X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ertaining the additional piece of evidence that no investment will be made during the financial year 1986-87, whereas no such evidence had ever been produced before the Assessing Officer during the course of the assessment proceedings and the Tribunal was not justified in accepting it before providing proper opportunity to the Assessing Officer or to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in view of the rules as laid down in rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 ?" Briefly stated the facts are that in the assessment year 1987-88 against the net returned income of Rs. 25,388 the original assessment was completed on a total income of Rs. 53 lakhs which was, however, set aside on appeal by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-I, Varan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeal filed by the assessee was allowed and that of the Revenue was dismissed. The Tribunal held that under section 69 of the Income-tax Act, any addition on account of unexplained investments which are not recorded in the books of account, if any, maintained by the assessee could only be assessed on the basis of the financial year immediately preceding the assessment year in which the investment was made. It held as under : " Admittedly, the assessment year of the assessee is 1987-88 and the previous financial year for this assessment year will be from April 1, 1986, to March 31, 1987. From the account books of the assessee copy of which is filed at page 21, it is very clear that the last amount spent was on March 27, 1986. It means that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e parties have been heard. Learned counsel for the Revenue argued that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was not justified in entertaining the additional evidence, to the effect that no investment in the construction of the building was made during the financial year relevant to the assessment year in question and, in any case, before entertaining such an evidence an opportunity should have been allowed to the assessing authority. We have considered these submissions carefully. From the perusal of the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal passed in appeal, it does not appear that any such objection was raised before it. The Tribunal, in its order, rejecting the application for reference under section 256(1), has refuted the plea th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
