ACIT-24(1), MUMBAI, PIRAMAL CHAMBER V. AMBIKA TRADING CORPORATION, ANDHERI WEST

ITA 5906/MUM/2024

AI Insights

The case involves the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax as the appellant and Ambika Trading Corporation as the respondent, concerning the assessment year 2014-15. The core issue revolves around the admission of additional evidence by the CIT(A) during the appeal, which was not presented during the initial assessment. The AO had made significant additions to the respondent's income under section 69 of the Income Tax Act, citing unreported purchases of immovable property. The CIT(A), upon receiving additional documents from the respondent, deleted these additions without a remand report from the AO. The Tribunal found procedural lapses in the admission of these documents and restored the case to the CIT(A) for a comprehensive re-evaluation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 653206 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: ADITYA M. RAI; RELYING
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

"1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No.5906/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Room No. 601, 6th Floor, Piramal Chamber, Parel 400012 Vs Ambika Trading Corporation 101 Shree Ambashanti Chambers, Opp. Hotel Leena, Mumbai 400059 PAN: AAJFA1123H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by None Respondent by Shri. Aditya M. Rai (SR. DR) Date of Hearing 18.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement 19.06.2025 ORDER Per: SHRI. SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M.: The present appeal filed by the revenue arises out of final assessment order passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)- Delhi dated 27/09/2024 for assessment year 2014-15 on following grounds of appeal: 2. Ground number 1 to 3 raised by the revenue are interrelated and interconnected and relates to challenging the order of Ld. CIT(A) in admitting the additional evidence in contravention of rule 46 of Income Tax Rules. Therefore, we have decided to adjudicate these grounds through the present consolidated order. 2 ITA No. 5906/Mum/2024 Ay 2014-15 Ambika Trading Corporation 2 3. We have heard the representatives of the parties, perused the material placed on record, orders passed by the revenue authorities. 4. From the records, we noticed that the AO in this case had made additions of Rs.7,91,06,000/- u/s. 69 of the Act, on the ground that the respondent had purchased immovable property which was reflecting in AIR statement, but no details were submitted during the course of re-assessment proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act. 5. However, during the course of appeal, Ld. CIT(E) admitted additional evidence in the shape of Sr. No Contents Paper Book Page 1 Written Submissions dtd. 27.04.2024, 07.05.02024 25 to 59 2 Allotment letter dated 18.07.2012 71-76 3 Agreement to sale dated 10.08.2012 77-91 4 Balance Sheet as on 31st March 2012 to 31.03.2014 92-104 5 Ledger Account of Sreekant, Officer 105-106 6 Government approved valuer report dtd. 15.04.12 135-145 7 Bank Statement of F.Y. 2011-12, 2012-13 107-134 Which was submitted by the assessee vide different written statements and consequently deleted the additions. 6. It is an admitted fact that none of the above documents were filed by the assessee during the course of assessment. Therefore, CIT(A) forwarded these documents to the AO for seeking his 3 ITA No. 5906/Mum/2024 Ay 2014-15 Ambika Trading Corporation 3 remand report, however when no remand report was filed by the AO then Ld. CIT(A) passed orders in favour of assessee by relying upon the documents filed by the assessee and deleted the additions. 7. At the very outset, we had directed the assessee to place on record the copy of application, which, according to the assessee was filed before the Ld. CIT(A) for seeking permission to file additional evidence, but even in spite of specific directions vide order dated 12/6/25 in open court, the assessee or his representative failed to file any such application and even did not appear or informed the court, in spite of repeated calls. In the order of Ld. CIT(A), there is no mention of any specific application moved under rule 46 of Income Tax Rules. Since the documents filed and relied upon by the assessee are of factual in nature and required verification. However, Ld. CIT(A) has not even mentioned as to how under the circumstances, the provisions of rule 46 of Income Tax Rules are attracted, but had admitted the documents and treated the same as evidence only because of the fact that the remand report was not filed by the AO. 8. Be that as it may, in our view, the interest of justice would be met. In case the matter is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to adjudicate these issue afresh after seeking verification of the documents being relied upon by the assessee. Ld. CIT(A) has co-terminous powers with that of AO therefore, Ld. CIT(A) can exercise all the powers that of AO or can also call for the remand report. In doing so, if Ld. CIT(A) comes to the 4 ITA No. 5906/Mum/2024 Ay 2014-15 Ambika Trading Corporation 4 conclusion that the subordinate officials are not complying with the directions, then is that eventuality Ld. CIT(A) is at liberty to take appropriate action in accordance with law. 9. Thus, keeping in view our above observations, we restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for deciding it afresh on merits by providing opportunity of hearing to the parties. The parties shall remain cooperative during the course of proceedings. 10. Before parting, we make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute, which shall be adjudicated by the Ld. CIT(A) independently in accordance with law. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 19/06/2025 Sd/- Sd/- (PRABHASH SHANKAR) (SANDEEP GOSAIN) (ACCOUNTAMT MEMBER) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Mumbai: Dated: 19/06/2025 Divya R. Nandgaonkar Stenographer Copy of the order forwarded to: (1)The Appellant (2) The Respondent (3) The CIT 5 ITA No. 5906/Mum/2024 Ay 2014-15 Ambika Trading Corporation 5 (4) The CIT (Appeals) (5) The DR, I.T.A.T. True Copy By order (Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai. "