, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , !, # !$ BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.3401/MDS/2016 ' (' / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 M/S KAILASH POMONA INDUSTRIES LTD., SOKKANUR ROAD, ELUR (PO), VADAPUDUR, OTHAKKAL MANDAPAM (VIA), COIMBATORE 641 031. PAN : AADCP 9243 N V. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1, COIMBATORE. (*+/ APPELLANT) (,-*+/ RESPONDENT) *+ . / / APPELLANT BY : SMT. B. JAISHEILA, CA ,-*+ . / / RESPONDENT BY : NONE 0 . 1# / DATE OF HEARING : 01.01.2018 23( . 1# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05.01.2018 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-1, COIMBAT ORE, DATED 24.06.2016 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. 2. SMT. B. JAISHEILA, THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE FOR TH E ASSESSEE, SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED ADDITIONAL EVIDEN CE BEFORE THIS 2 I.T.A. NO.3401/MDS/16 TRIBUNAL. ACCORDING TO THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE, SIN CE THE ASSESSEE- COMPANY CLOSED ITS BUSINESS DURING THE COURSE OF AS SESSMENT PROCEEDING, THE CONFIRMATION LETTER AND OTHER MATER IAL COULD NOT BE FILED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE CIT(APPE ALS). THEREFORE, ACCORDING TO THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE, THE ADDITIONAL MATERIALS WERE FILED BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. ACCORDING TO THE LD. R EPRESENTATIVE, THE MATERIAL FILED BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL AS ADDITIONAL E VIDENCE IN THE FORM OF CONFIRMATION LETTER AND OTHER DOCUMENTS ARE ABSO LUTELY ESSENTIAL FOR ADJUDICATING THE ISSUE OF ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SH ORT 'THE ACT'). 3. NO ONE APPEARED FOR THE REVENUE INSPITE OF ISSUE OF NOTICE. 4. THE FIRST ISSUE ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION IS WITH REGARD TO ADDITION OF 1,95,35,270/- UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO CLAIMED ANOTHER SUM OF 12,69,604/- AS REVENUE EXPENDITURE UNDER SECTION 37 OF THE ACT TOWARDS THE RENT PAID. THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED BEFOR E THIS TRIBUNAL THAT THE CONFIRMATION LETTER AND THE ADDITIONAL MAT ERIAL COULD NOT BE FILED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER DURING THE COURS E OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING SINCE THE BUSINESS WAS CLOSED BY THE ASS ESSEE. 3 I.T.A. NO.3401/MDS/16 5. THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT WHEN THE ASSESSEE CLAIMS THAT THE BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE W AS CLOSED AND THE CONFIRMATION LETTER COULD NOT BE OBTAINED DURIN G THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING, GIVING ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE WOULD NOT PREJUDICE THE INTERESTS OF REVEN UE IN ANY WAY. GIVING ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE WOULD D EFINITELY PROMOTE THE CAUSE OF JUSTICE. SINCE THE ADDITIONA L EVIDENCE IS FILED FIRST TIME BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL, THIS TRIBUNAL IS O F THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE MATTER NEEDS TO BE RE-EXAMINED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ACCORDINGLY, ORDERS OF BOTH THE AUTHORITI ES BELOW ARE SET ASIDE AND THE ISSUE OF ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT AND THE CLAIM OF RENT PAID IS REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSING O FFICER SHALL RE- EXAMINE THE MATTER AFRESH IN THE LIGHT OF THE MATER IAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THEREAFTER DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, AFTER GIVING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE A SSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 4 I.T.A. NO.3401/MDS/16 ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 5 TH JANUARY, 2018 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ! ) ( . . . ) (S. JAYARAMAN) (N.R.S. GANESAN) # / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 5 /DATED, THE 5 TH JANUARY, 2018. KRI. . ,167 87(1 /COPY TO: 1. *+ /APPELLANT 2. ,-*+ /RESPONDENT 3. 0 91 () /CIT(A)-1, COIMBATORE 4. PRINCIPAL CIT- 1, COIMBATORE 5. 7: ,1 /DR 6. ' ; /GF.