TMI Blog2020 (4) TMI 748X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xamine the witness produced by the appellant, or (b) to produce any evidence or document or any witness in rebuttal of the additional evidence produced by the appellant but he failed to provide such reasonable opportunity to the AO. CIT(A) had only provided a perfunctory opportunity, and a very short time to the Assessing Officer. The letter asking the AO to send report is dated 08.03.2016 whereas the time was allowed to the Assessing Officer up to an earlier date 16.03.2015. It is not understood how a letter dated 08.03.2016 can be responded to by the AO by an earlier date of 16.03.2015. CIT(A) had failed to provide reasonable opportunity to the Assessing Officer for which the Assessing Officer was entitled under Rule 46A(3) of Income T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of his creditors, capacity of creditors to advance money and genuineness of the transactions. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on fact in deleting addition as per provision to section 2(22)(e) of the I.T. Act of ₹ 1,13,83,287/-(14941811 - 3558524) when assessee is having substantial interest in the companies from where loan was taken. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on fact in deleting addition as per provision to section 2(22)(e) of the I.T. Act of ₹ 1,13,83,287/-(14941811 -3558524) when assessee was not filed any explanation during the course of assessment proceedings despite specific query by notice U/s 142(1) dated 20.03.2016. 5. Therefore, the order of Ld. CIT(A) may be set aside and that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 19 and 04.11.2019 also; neither the assessee was present in person nor was represented by any Authorised Representative. In the absence of any representation from the assessee s side we are deciding this appeal after hearing the Learned Senior Departmental Representative ( Ld. Sr.DR for short), in accordance with Rule 25 of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1962. At the time of hearing, the Ld. Departmental Representative drew our attention to the fact that nowhere in the impugned appellate order dated 30.03.2016 of the Ld. CIT(A), has the Ld. CIT(A) mentioned, that he has admitted the additional evidences furnished by the assessee during the appellate proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A). Yet, even without specifically admitting the add ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... perfunctory opportunity, and a very short time to the Assessing Officer. The letter asking the Assessing Officer to send report is dated 08.03.2016 whereas the time was allowed to the Assessing Officer up to an earlier date 16.03.2015. It is not understood how a letter dated 08.03.2016 can be responded to by the Assessing Officer by an earlier date of 16.03.2015. Even if 16.03.2015 is treated as a typographical mistake, and read as 16.03.2016, even then, the time allowed by the Ld. CIT(A) to the Assessing Officer was of only a few days in the month of March. Therefore, we are of the view that the Ld. CIT(A) had failed to provide reasonable opportunity to the Assessing Officer for which the Assessing Officer was entitled under Rule 46A(3) of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
