ITA NO.1923/KOL/12-C-AM M/S. DIANA CAPITAL LIMITED VS. ITO W 6(1), KOL. 1 , C IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, C BENCH: KO LKATA ( ) , 1 , BEFORE HONBLE SRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM & HONBLE SRI GEORGE MATHAN , JM $ / ITA NO. 1923/KOL/2012 A.Y 2009-2010 M/S. DIANA CAPITAL LIMITED PAN: AACD8671R - - - VERSUS - . I.T.O WARD 6(1), KOLKATA ( % / APPELLANT ) ( &'% / RESPONDENT ) FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE RESPONDENT : /SHRI SUBASH AGARWAL, ADVOCATE / SHRI RAVI JAIN, LD. CIT/SR.DR * + /DATE OF HEARING: 10-09-2014 * + /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 10-09-2014 / ORDER , SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAI NST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) DATED 27-11-2012 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE RE AD AS UNDER:- 1. FOR THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITI ON OF RS.59,98,308/- MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF AMOUNT PAYABLE TO M/S. SREI INTERNATIONAL FINANCE PVT. LTD. 2. FOR THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE, THE LD.CIT(A) ERRED IN INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 41(1) I N RESPECT OF THE ABOVEMENTIONED OUTSTANDING LIABILITY OF RS.59,98,30 8/- BY WRONGLY TREATING THE SAME AS CESSATION OF LIABILITY. 3. IN THIS CASE AT THE OUTSET THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT CERTAIN ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES HAVE COME TO THE POSSESSION O F THE ASSESSEE. THESE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES RELATED TO THE PAYMENT OF THE IMPUGNED AMOUNT PAYA BLE TO M/S. SREI INTERNATIONAL FINANCE PVT. LTD. THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THA T WHEN THE GENUINENESS OF THE SUBSEQUENT ITA NO.1923/KOL/12-C-AM M/S. DIANA CAPITAL LIMITED VS. ITO W 6(1), KOL. 2 PAYMENT IS CONSIDERED, THE ADDITION U/S.41(1) OF TH E ACT MAY NOT SURVIVE. HE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT IN TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO THE A SSESSEE HAS BEEN ABLE TO LIQUIDATE THE OUTSTANDING AMOUNT. HENCE, HE PLEADED THAT THE ADDI TIONAL EVIDENCE(S) MAY BE REMITTED TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO CONSIDER THE ISSUE IN THE LIGHT O F ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES. 4. THE LD. CIT/DR FAIRLY AGREED THAT IN THE LIGHT OF THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES AND NATURE THEREOF, THE ISSUE MAY BE REMITTED TO THE FILE OF THE AO. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE LD. COUNSEL AND PERUSED THE RECORD. UPON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION, WE ARE INCLINED TO REMIT THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO CONSIDER THE ISSUE AFRESH KEEPING IN MIND THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES BEI NG SUBMITTED BEFORE US IN THIS REGARD. NEEDLESS TO ADD THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE GRANTED ADEQU ATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. . + ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 10 /09/201 4 SD/- SD/ - [ 1 , ] [ , ] [ GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ] [ SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( + ) DATED : 10/9 /2014 ** PRADIP SPS * &2 32 / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. . % / THE APPELLANT : M/S. DIANA CAPITAL LIMITED, 3-B LAL BAZAR ST., 4 TH FL., KOL-1. 2 &'% / THE RESPONDENT- I.T.O W 6(1), KOL, AAYKAR BHA VAN, P-7 CHOWINGHEE SQ, KOL- 69. 3. 5. / THE CIT, 4. ( )/ THE CIT(A) & / DR, KOLKATA BENCH 6.GUARD FILE . '2 & / TRUE COPY, / BY ORDER, / ASSTT REGIST RAR ITA NO.1923/KOL/12-C-AM M/S. DIANA CAPITAL LIMITED VS. ITO W 6(1), KOL. 3