U.V Ramana Murthy Raju, Visakhapatnam V. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Visakhapatnam

ITA 629/VIZ/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7768 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 13-11-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUMAN MALIK
• Assessee Lawyers: P S RAJU
• Keywords: Additional evidence

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM SMC BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO , HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 629 / VIZ /201 9 (ASST. YEAR : 20 06 - 07 ) U.V. RAMANA MURTHY RAJU, D.NO. 50 - 1 - 59/2/5, ASR NAGAR, SEETHAMMADHARA, VISAKHAPATNAM. V S . A CIT, CIRCLE - 5 (1), VISAKHAPATNAM. PAN NO. AAFPU 6285 N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI P.S. RAJU C A. DEPARTMENT BY : SMT. SUMAN MALIK SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 27 / 0 1 /2020 . DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29 / 0 1 /20 20 . O R D E R TH IS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 1 , VISAKHAPATNAM , DATED 1 9 /0 8 /201 9 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 07 . 2. THE ONLY ISSUED INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IN RESPECT OF ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF RS. 12,50,000/ - U/SEC. 68 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS 'ACT'). 3 . IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO FILE THE DETAILS IN RESPECT OF THE ABOVE ADDITION. 2 ITA NO. 1629/VIZ/2019 (U.V. RAMANA MURTHY RAJU ) THE ASSESSEE MADE THE SUBMISSIONS , WHICH WAS NOT ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4 . ON APPEA L , LD. CIT(A) SIMPLY CONFIRMED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 5. BEFORE ME, LD. AR HAS FILED ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WHICH IS AT PAGE NOS. 15 TO 19 OF THE PAPER BOOK AND FILED A PETITION U/SEC. 29 OF THE I.T. RULES, 1962 AND SUBMITTED THAT ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS MATERIAL EVIDENCE AND IS NECESSARY TO DECIDE THE APPEAL A ND ALSO SUBMITTED THAT HE COULD NOT FILE THESE MATERIAL BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES FOR THE REASON THAT ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT ASK THE SAME, EVEN LD. CIT(A) ALSO NOT GRANTED SUFFICIENT TIME AND SUBMITTED THAT SAME MAY BE ADMITTED AND REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. 6 . LD.DR STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 7 . I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE M A TERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH ARE CONFIRMATION LETTER GIVEN BY THE UNION BANK OF INDIA AND ALSO THE AFFIDAVIT GIVEN BY SHRI PAKALAPATI RAMESH VARMA WHICH RELATES TO IMPUGNED ADDITION OF RS. 12,50,000/ - , WHICH IS MATERIAL EVIDENCE TO DECIDE THIS APPEAL . THE REFORE, I AM OF THE OPINION THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED BY THE 3 ITA NO. 1629/VIZ/2019 (U.V. RAMANA MURTHY RAJU ) ASSESSEE IN THE FORM OF PAPER BOOK AT PAGE NOS. 15 TO 19 HAS TO BE ADMITTED. ACCORDINGLY, I ADMIT THE SAME AND REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH A DIRECTION TO ADJUDICATE THE SAME DENOVO IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. THUS, THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 8 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESS EE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON TH IS 2 9 T H DAY OF JAN. , 20 20 . S D / - ( V. DURGA RAO ) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 2 9 T H JANUARY , 20 20 . VR/ - COPY TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE U.V. RAMANA MURTHY RAJU, D.NO. 50 - 1 - 59/2/5, ASR NAGAR, SEETHAMMADHARA, VISAKHAPATNAM. 2. THE REVENUE ACIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), VISAKHAPATNAM. 3. THE PR. CIT - 2, VISAKHAPATNAM. 4. THE CIT(A) - 1, VISAKHAPATNAM. 5. THE D.R . , VISAKHAPATNAM. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER (VUKKEM RAMBABU) SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY, ITAT, VISAKHAPATNAM.