Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Amritsar
Balwinder Kaur, Jalandhar vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward Iii(1), ... on 28 November, 2019
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "DB", BENCH AMRITSAR BEFORE SHRI N.K. CHOUDHRY, JM & DR. A.L.SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.423/ASR/2017 ( नधारणवष / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Balwinder Kaur Vs. ITO 38, Civil Lines, Ward-III(1), Jalandhar City, Jalandhar, Punjab. Punjab.
थायीले खासं . /जीआइआरसं . /PAN/GIR No.: ABDPK 1857 F (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. R.K. Bajaj, Adv.
Respondent by : Sh. Charan Das, DR.
सुनवाईक तार ख/ Date of Hearing : 28/11/2019
घोषणाक तार ख/Date of Pronouncement : 28/11/20198 2/
आदे श / O R D E R
Per Dr. A.L. Saini:
The captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to assessment year 2006-07, is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Jalandhar in appeal No. 74/16-17/CIT(A)/Jal. which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act) dated 04.03.2014.
2. The main grievance of the assessee in this appeal is that ld. CIT(A) has wrongly ignored the valuation report so submitted by the appellant during the appellate proceedings which is most unjustified and unreasonable and uncalled for.
3. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. We note that ld. CIT(A) has rejected the additional evidences filed by the assessee observing the following:
ITA No.423/ASR/2017Assessment Year: 2006-07 Balwinder Kaur
"4.8 Having considered the material available on record, I find that objections raised by the Assessing Officer with regard to the admission of additional evidence under Rule 46A of the IT Rules are valid. The appellant, though the issue has been set aside by the Hon'ble ITAT, does not get an automatic right to file additional evidence without having proved the circumstances which prevented him from filing the same earlier. Therefore, I uphold the objections raised by the Assessing Officer that additional evidence filed by the appellant deserves to be rejected."
4. We note that the assessee has submitted before us that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause not to submit the additional evidences before the Assessing Officer, therefore he submitted additional evidences before the ld. CIT(A) which ought to be admitted by ld. CIT(A). The ld. Counsel for the assessee stated before the Bench that the assessee now is ready to submit the circumstances and facts which prevented him from filing the evidences before the Assessing Officer and will justify that, additional evidences should be admitted. Therefore an another opportunity should be given to the assessee to plead his case before the ld. CIT(A). We note that ld. CIT(A) has rejected the additional evidences submitted by the assessee holding that the assessee does not get any automatic right to file additional evidences without having proved the circumstances which prevented him from filing these additional evidences before the Assessing Officer. Keeping in mind the principle of natural justice we note that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to prove the circumstances and facts which prevented assessee from filing these additional evidences before the Assessing Officer. We also direct the ld. CIT(A) to admit the additional evidences in accordance with law.
5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the Court on 28.11.2019 Sd/- Sd/-
(N.K. CHOUDHRY) (A.L.SAINI)
"या यकसद य / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखासद य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AmritsarAmritsar
*दनांक/ Date: 28/11/2019
(BCG, PS)
Page | 2
ITA No.423/ASR/2017
Assessment Year: 2006-07
Balwinder Kaur
Copy of the order forwarded to:
1. Balwinder Kaur, 38, Civil Lines, Jalandhar City, Punjab.
2. ITO Ward-III(1), Jalandhar, Punjab.
3. C.I.T(A)-2, Jalandhar.
4. C.I.T.- concerned.
5. The Sr. DR, I.T.A.T., Amritsar.
True copy By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Amritsar Bench Page | 3