TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 2143X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... judication of the matter - HELD THAT:- Hon`ble Delhi High Court, in the case of Text Hundred India (P) Limited [ 2013 (6) TMI 72 - DELHI HIGH COURT ] held that: It is well-settled that the procedure is handmaid of justice and justice should not be allowed to be choked only because of some inadvertent error or omission on the part of one of the parties to lead evidence at the appropriate stage. Once it is found that the party intending to lead evidence before the Tribunal for the first time was prevented by sufficient cause to lead such an evidence and that this evidence would have material bearing on the issue which needs to be decided by the Tribunal and ends of justice demand admission of such an evidence, the Tribunal can pass an or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Counsel for the assessee has submitted before us the additional evidences pertaining to Assessment Years 2005-06, 2006-07 and 2007-08, which were not submitted by the assessee neither before the Assessing Officer nor before the ld. CIT(A). A statement showing year-wise issue of additional evidences, as submitted by the ld. counsel before the Bench is reproduced below for ready reference: BEFORE THE HON BLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, B BENCH KOLKATA In the matter of : IT Appeal Nos. 1945 and 1980-82 (Kol) of 2013 and 515, 606 and 1163(Kol) of 2014 West Bengal Electronic Industry Development Corporation Limited (A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gardening expenses To be argued Loans written off Covered 4. Learned counsel for the assessee begins by pointing out that assessee is a nodel agency of Government of West Bengal for development of IT and ITES sectors in the state of West Bengal. The ld. counsel submitted before the Bench that these additional evidences, pertaining to Assessment Years 2005-06, 2006-07 and 2007-08 were not submitted before the Lower Authorities, as the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from producing these additional evidences. During the assessment proceedings, as well as appellate proceedings, the assessee had not been guided by the Professionals/Accountants therefore, these evi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ich the authorities below made addition to the taxable income of the assessee. 7. We note that the assessee may produce additional evidences before the Tribunal in terms of Rule 29 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 which is reproduced below: 29. The parties to the appeal shall not be entitled to produce additional evidence either oral or documentary before the Tribunal, but if the Tribunal requires any document to be produced or any witness to be examined or any affidavit to be filed to enable it to pass orders or for any other substantial cause, or, if the income-tax authorities have decided the case without giving sufficient opportunity to the assessee to adduce evidence either on points specified by them or not s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the opportunity to file evidence before the AO or even the CIT(A) but he could not file because he was not guided by the authorized representative (AR) and this is a substantial cause which falls in (b) above. Since, these additional evidences are being submitted before the Bench first time therefore, keeping in mind the principle of natural justice and fair play, we are of the view that Assessing Officer should be allowed a reasonable opportunity to examine them because this ensures full, fair and detailed enquiry and verification. 8. We note that a neat principle of law that discretion lies with the Tribunal to admit additional evidence in the interest of justice once the Tribunal affirms the opinion that doing so would be necessar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
