Shri Vijay Kantilal Panchal, Ahmedabad V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-14(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 2676/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0484 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-03-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 04-03-2013
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 29-11-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: Y P VERMA
• Assessee Lawyers: D K TARIKH
• Keywords: Additional evidence

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT AHMEDABAD B BENCH BEFORE: SHRI D.K. TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTAN T MEMBER SRI VIJAY K. PANCHAL PAN NO. ABCPP2173L (APPELLANT) VS . THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-14(1), AHMEDABAD (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : SRI Y.P. VERMA, SR.D.R. ASSESSEE BY : SRI D.K. TARIKH, A.R. DATE OF HEARING : 04-03-2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08-03-2013 / ORDER PER : D.K. TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- THIS IS THE ASSESSEES APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-XXI, AHMEDABAD DATED 14-09-2012. 2. THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEAL IS AGGRIEVED BY THE ACTION OF LD. CIT(A) IN NOT ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED BY HIM AND CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 17,13,162/- MADE BY ASSESSING OFFIC ER BY PASSING AN EX-PARTE ORDER. AT THE TIME OF HEARING LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT ADMITTED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED BEFORE HIM BY THE ITA NO. 2676/AHD/2012 A.Y.:-2009-10 I.T.A NO. 2676/AHD/2012 A.Y. 2009-10 PAGE VIJAY K. PANCHAL VS. ITO 2 ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT ASSESSEE DID NOT GIVE A NY REASON FOR NOT PRODUCING THIS EVIDENCE EARLIER WHILE THE FACT IS THAT THE REASON WAS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE LD. CIT(A) VIDE ITS LETTER DATE D 25 TH JULY, 2012. HE THEREFORE PRAYED THAT LD. CIT(A) MAY KINDLY BE DIRE CTED TO ADMIT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE HI M AND DECIDE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON MERITS AFTER TAKING INTO CONSIDERAT ION THIS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE SO FILED. LD. D.R. DID NOT SERIOUSLY OBJECT TO THI S SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, THE MATTER IS RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION IN THE LIGHT OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FI LED BY THE ASSESSEE. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONE D HEREINABOVE AT CAPTION PAGE SD/- SD/- (ANIL CHATURVEDI) (D.K.TYAGI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER J UDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD : DATED 08 /03/2013 AK / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. / APPELLANT 2. / RESPONDENT 3. / CONCERNED CIT 4. - / CIT (A) 5. , ! , '# / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. $% &' / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , ( / ' ) ! , '#