DISTRICT PROJECT CO-ORDINATOR, SERVA SHIKSHA ABHIYAN, Alwar V. ITO (TDS), Alwar

ITA 998/JPR/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2019 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-06-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 23-05-2017
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 15-11-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: POONAM ROY DCIT DHK
• Assessee Lawyers: BANWARI LAL ACCOUNTANT
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 2

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR JH HKKXPAN] YS[KK LNL; ] DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VK;DJ VIHY LA- @ ITA NOS. 998 & 997/JP/2016 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 & 2014-15 DISTRICT PROJECT CO-ORDINATOR, SARVA SHIKSHA ABHIYAN, KALI MORI PHATAK, ALWAR. CUKE VS. I.T.O. (TDS), ALWAR. PAN/TAN NO.: JPRDO 2399 F VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ L S@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI GIRISH KUMAR (CA) & SHRI BANWARI LAL (ACCOUNTANT) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SMT. POONAM ROY (DCIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF HEARING : 28/06/2017 MN?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30/06/2017 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: BHAGCHAND, A.M. BOTH THE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDERS DATED 26/09/2016 OF LD. CIT(A), ALWAR PERTAINING TO T HE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2013-14 AND 2014-15. IN BOTH THESE APPEALS, THERE A RE ONLY ONE COMMON ISSUE, WHICH IS AGAINST CONFIRMING THE DEMAND U/S 2 01(1)/201(1A) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). ITA 998 & 997/JP/2016_ DISTRICT PROJECT COORDINATOR VS ITO (TDS) 2 2. AT THE OUTSET OF HEARING, THE LD AR OF THE ASSES SEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES, WHICH COULD NOT BE FILED BEFOR E THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AS THEY ARE NOT AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE AT THAT TI ME, THEREFORE, THESE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES MAY BE ADMITTED BEFORE THE ITA T. 3. ON THE CONTRARY, THE LD DR HAS STATED THAT ANY N EW FACTS FIRSTLY MAY BE CONSIDERED BEFORE THE A.O. 4. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE SIDES AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY, IT IS FOUND APPROPRIATE THAT THE ISSUE NEEDS FRESH LOO K AT THE LEVEL OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS THERE ARE CERTAIN FACTUAL INAC CURACIES WHICH NEEDS DEFINITE FINDINGS TO DECIDE THE ISSUE. IN VIEW OF TH IS, THE ISSUES RAISED IN APPEALS ARE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESS ING OFFICER. 5. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30/06/2017. SD/- HKKXPAN (BHAGCHAND) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ TK;IQJ TK;IQJ TK;IQJ@ @@ @ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 30 TH JUNE, 2017 *RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANT- THE DISTRICT PROJECT COORDINATOR, SARV A SHIKSHA ABHIYAN, ALWAR. ITA 998 & 997/JP/2016_ DISTRICT PROJECT COORDINATOR VS ITO (TDS) 3 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- THE I.T.O. (TDS), ALWAR. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY @ THE CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ @ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY @ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 998 & 997/JP/2016) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR