MR. JITENDRA SOMAIYA, MUMBAI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CIRCLE 12(1)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 5289/MUM/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 109 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1311 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-02-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 13-08-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Additional evidence

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH F, MUMBAI , !'#,$%!' &! BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER !. 5289/ / 2019 (%*. . 2016-17 ) ITA NO.5289/MUM/2019(A.Y.2016-17) MR.JITENDRA SOMAIYA, 505/506, CORPROATE CENTRE, NIRMAL LIFESTYLE, LBS ROAD, MULUND(W), MUMBAI 400 080. PAN:AANPS0138G ...... #, / APPELLANT * VS. ITO-CIRCLE 12(1)(1), EARNEST HOUSE, MUMBAI 400 021 ..... %-/ RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : MS. USHA GAIKWAD ! *.%- #/ DATE OF HEARING : 08/02/2021 /0 .%- #/ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08/02/2021 &/ ORDER PER VIKAS AWASTHY,JM: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINS T THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEALS-20, MUMBAI [IN S HORT CIT(A)] DATED 28/06/2019 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17. 2 ITA NO.5289/MUM/2019(A.Y.2016-17) 2. THE ASSESSEE IN APPEAL HAS ASSAILED THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IN NOT ADMITTING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FILED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING FIRST APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS AND CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.73,500/- ON ACC OUNT OF DEEMED RENTAL INCOME. 3. A PERUSAL OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER SHOWS THAT THE A SSESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITION OF RS. 73,500/- UNDER THE HEAD INCOME F ROM HOUSE PROPERTY ON ACCOUNT OF DEEMED RENTAL INCOME. THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE BUILDING ON WHICH DEEMED RENTAL INCOME HAS BEEN ASS ESSED IS IN DILAPIDATED CONDITION. TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS SUBMISSIONS, THE ASS ESSEE FILED SOME ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. TH E CIT(A) WITHOUT LOOKING INTO THE EVIDENCES REJECTED THE SAME BEING NOT ADMISSIB LE IN TERMS OF RULE 46A OF THE INCOME TAX RULES, 1962. IT IS TRITE THAT RU LES OF PROCEDURE ARE MEANT AS HAND MADE OF JUSTICE WITH A VIEW TO AID THE ATTAINM ENT OF JUSTICE IN AN ORDERLY WAY. AT THE SAME TIME IT IS TO BE SEEN THAT TAKIN G A PEDANTIC AND HYPER TECHNICAL VIEW OF THE MATTER UNDER THE UMBRELLA OF RULES SHOULD NOT LEAD TO INJUSTICE, ABSURDITY OR A TRAVESTY OF ITS PURPOSE. THE PRAYER FOR ADMITTING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE SHOULD NOT BE REJECTED ESPECIA LLY WHERE ARGUABLE POINTS OF FACTS AND LAW ARE INVOLVED. 4. CONSIDERING ENTIRE FACTS OF THE CASE, WE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO RESTORE THIS APPEAL TO CIT(A). THE CIT(A) AFTER ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FILED BY THE ASSESSEE SHALL SEEK REPORT FROM THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER UNDER RULE 46A(3) AND THEREAFTER, DECIDE THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE AFR ESH, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS SET-ASIDE AND THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 3 ITA NO.5289/MUM/2019(A.Y.2016-17) 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL BY ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON MONDAY, T HE 8 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2021. SD/- SD/- (PRAMOD KUMAR) (VIKAS AWAS THY) / VICE PRESIDENT $%!'/ JUDICIAL MEMBER / MUMBAI, 2*/ DATED 08/02/2021 VM , SR. PS (O/S) %-3 4& 0- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. #, / THE APPELLANT , 2. %- / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 5- ( )/ THE CIT(A)- 4. 5- CIT 5. 67%-%* , . . . , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 789: / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// ( DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI