TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal grants appeal for health reasons, allows additional evidence.</h1> <h3>Sunil Kumar Garg Versus ITO, Ward 36 (2), New Delhi.</h3> Sunil Kumar Garg Versus ITO, Ward 36 (2), New Delhi. - TMI Issues involved:The judgment deals with the addition of Rs.1,47,10,075/- under section 41(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2014-15.Addition of Rs.1,47,10,075/- under section 41(1) of the Income Tax Act:The appellant, engaged in trading of menthol oil, had a disputed amount in the name of a creditor, M/s Suraj Trading Company. The Assessing Officer (AO) sought reconciliation of the difference but the appellant failed to comply despite multiple opportunities. Consequently, the AO treated the difference as representing remission or cessation of trading liability under section 41(1) of the Act.Submission of additional evidences and documents:Before the CIT (Appeals), the appellant submitted additional evidences and documents, seeking an opportunity to be heard. However, the CIT (A) found that the appellant did not respond to previous opportunities provided by the AO. The CIT (A) declined to admit the application under Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, and upheld the addition under section 41(1) of the Act based on the material available with the AO.Appeal and fresh consideration:The appellant appealed the CIT (A)'s decision, citing genuine reasons for the delay in submitting documents due to the appellant's health issues. Medical prescriptions were attached as evidence. The appellant requested a remittance of the matter to the CIT (A) for fresh consideration in light of the additional evidences and submissions made.Decision and direction of the Tribunal:The Tribunal acknowledged the reasonable cause of the appellant's ailment that hindered document submission to the AO. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal directed the CIT (A) to accept the additional evidences and submissions, and to pass an order as per law after due consideration. The appellant was to be granted adequate opportunity of being heard. Consequently, the appeal of the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes.This judgment highlights the importance of providing reasonable cause for non-compliance, the acceptance of additional evidence in the appellate process, and the need for a fair opportunity to be heard in tax matters.
TaxTMI 