IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 1645/HYD/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, A PPELLANT CIRCLE 2(1), HYDERABAD VS. SRI K. VIJAYAN, RESPONDENT HYDERABAD. (PAN AKTPK4760C) APPELLANT BY : SHRIGANGADHAR PANDA REVENUE BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 30/05/2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30/05/ 2013 ORDER PER ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, J.M.: THIS APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AG AINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A), GUNTUR DATED 29/08/2012 FOR THE A SSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. 2. BRIEFLY THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSES SEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL HAILED FROM A REMOTE VILLAGE MAHARAJAPUR AM, VIJAYAPURAM MANDAL, CHITTOOR DT. THE ASSESSEE IS DE RIVING INCOME FROM WINE SHOP. DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION , THE ASSESSEE FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME ON 29/09/2009 A DMITTING TOTAL 2 ITA NO. 1645/H/12 SRI K. VIJAYAN INCOME OF RS. 5,13,000/-, WHICH WAS PROCESSED U/S 1 43(1) ON 23/06/2010 BY THE AO AND DETERMINED THE TOTAL INCO ME AT RS. 27,79,930/- BY MAKING CERTAIN ADDITIONS. ON APPEAL, THE CIT(A) PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BY DELETI NG SOME OF THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO. 3. AGGRIEVED, THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US AN D HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IS ERRONEOUS BO TH IN LAW AND FACTS OF THE CASE. 2. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN NOT TAKING INTO CONS IDERATION THE FAILURE OF ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE MATERIAL EVIDENC E IN SUPPORT OF VARIOUS EXPENSES AND CLAIMS. 3. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITIO N UNILATERALLY RELYING UPON THE SUBMISSIONS FURNISHED BY AR OF THE ASSESSEE, WITHOUT CALLING FOR REMAND REPORT FRO M THE AO. 4. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO ALLOW AN OPPORT UNITY TO THE AO UNDER RULE 46A ADMITTING FRESH EVIDENCE DURI NG THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS AND HENCE THE APPELLATE ORDER IS VITIATED. 4. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT-ASSESS EE AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US. HOWEVER, WE PROCEED TO D ECIDE THE APPEAL AFTER HEARING THE LEARNED DR AND ON MERITS. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS OF THE LEARNED DR, P ERUSED THE RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHO RITIES BELOW. THE GRIEVANCE OF THE DEPARTMENT IS THAT AN OPPORTUN ITY HAS NOT BEEN GIVEN TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN TERMS OF RU LE 46A OF THE IT RULES, BEFORE DELETING THE ADDITIONS UNILATERALL Y RELYING UPON THE SUBMISSIONS FURNISHED BY AR OF THE ASSESSEE WIT HOUT CALLING FOR REMAND REPORT FROM THE AO AND ALSO THE CIT(A) W AS WRONG IN NOT TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE FAILURE OF THE AS SESSEE TO PRODUCE MATERIAL EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF VARIOUS EXP ENSES AND CLAIMS. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE INCLINED TO REMIT THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE AO WITH A DIRECTION TO EX AMINE THE 3 ITA NO. 1645/H/12 SRI K. VIJAYAN DETAILS FILED BY ASSESSEE AND DECIDE THE ISSUE DE-N OVO IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER PROVIDING REASONABLE OPPO RTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE IN THE MATTER. THUS, TH E GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE REVENUE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL P URPOSES. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30/05/2013 UPON CONCLUSION OF HEARING. SD/- SD/- (CHANDRA POOJARI) (ASHA VIJAYARAGHAV AN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBE R HYDERABAD, DATED: 30 TH MAY, 2013. KV COPY TO:- 1) DCIT, CIRCLE 2(1), TIRUPATHI. 2) SHRI K. VIJAYAN, DR. NO. 164, MAHARAJAPURAM VILLAGE , VIJAYANAGARAM MANDAL, CHITTOOR DT. 3) THE CIT (A), GUNTUR 4) THE CIT, TIRUPATHI 5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, I.T.A.T., HYDE RABAD.