Sh. Naresh Kumar, Karnal V. ITO, Karnal

ITA 5288/DEL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5485 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-01-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 16-01-2014
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 15-10-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KEYUR PATEL SENIOR
• Assessee Lawyers: K L ANEJA
• Keywords: Additional evidence

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH E : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.C. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.5288/DEL./2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10) SHRI NARESH KUMAR, VS. ITO, WARD 4, HOUSE NO.228, GALI NO.1, KARNAL. JYOTI NAGAR, KARNAL. (PAN : AWSPK6588K) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI K.L. ANEJA, ADVOCATE REVENUE BY : SHRI KEYUR PATEL, SENIOR DR ORDER PER B.C. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE EMANATES FROM THE ORDER OF CIT (APPEALS), KARNAL DATED 03.08.2012 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. 2. THE ASSESSEE IS A TRUCK OWNER AND ALSO OWNS 50 A CRES OF ANCESTRAL AGRICULTURAL LAND. THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED DECLARING INCOME FRO M PLYING OF TRUCKS AND AGRICULTURAL INCOME. THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE THE ADDITION WH ICH HAS BEEN CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT (A). NOW, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US BY TAKING THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS :- 1. THAT THE ORDERS OF LD. C.I.T. (A) IS ARBITRARY, ILLEGAL AND AGAINST THE FACTS. 2. THAT THE LD. C.I.T. (A) ERRED IN LAW IN CONFIRMI NG THE ORDERS OF I.T.O. REGARDING DISALLOWANCE OF RS.6,30,360/- UNDE R SECTION 40A (3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. ITA NO.5288/DEL./2012 2 3. THAT THE LD. C.I.T. (A) ERRED IN LAW IN CONFIRMI NG THE ORDERS OF I.T.O. IN NOT COMPUTING THE INCOME AS PER PROVISION OF SECTION 40AE OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 4. THAT THE LD. C.I.T. (A) ERRED IN LAW IN CONFIRMI NG THE ADDITION OF RS.14,65,000/- WHEN THE SOURCES WERE EXPLAINED AND NOT ENTERTAINING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE. 5. THAT THE LD. C.I.T. (A) ERRED IN LAW IN CONFIRMI NG THE ADDITION OF RS.70,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF LOW HOUSEHOLD EXPENDITURE . THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO TAKEN THE GROUND THAT THE ADD ITIONAL EVIDENCES WERE NOT ENTERTAINED WHICH EXPLAINS THE ADDITION MADE. 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES ON THE ISSUE. WE H AVE ALSO PERUSED THE DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED IN THE PAPER BOOK FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO MADE AN APPLICATION UNDER RULE 29 OF ITAT RULES, 1963 FOR A DMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES. THIS APPLICATION IS PLACED AT PAGE 3 OF THE PAPER B OOK AND ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES ARE ATTACHED THEREWITH FROM PAGES 4 TO 10. AFTER HEARING BOTH T HE SIDES, WE FIND IT APPROPRIATE THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY, THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES ARE TO BE ADMITTED AND ALL THE ISSUES ON WHICH THE ADDITIONS HAVE BEEN MADE IS TO BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR DECIDING AFRESH AFTER PROVIDING AN OPPO RTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED T O COOPERATE IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THIS 30 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2014 AFTER THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING. SD/- SD/- (DIVA SINGH) (B.C. MEENA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED THE 30 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2014 TS ITA NO.5288/DEL./2012 3 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3.CIT 4.CIT(A), KARNAL. 5.CIT(ITAT), NEW DELHI. AR, ITAT NEW DELHI.