TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (6) TMI 249
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the additional evidence. The refusal to admit the same so made by the learned CIT(A) is totally contrary to the provisions of law and facts on the record. Ground No. 3: The assessee is aggrieved that the learned CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in confirming the income at nil as assessed by the AO as against loss of Rs. 1,77,365 as declared by the assessee. Ground No. 4: The assessee is aggrieved that the learned CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in confirming the addition of Rs. 5,42,555 under s. 68 on account of unsecured loans. Ground No. 5: The assessee is aggrieved that the learned CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in confirming the addition of Rs. 7,75,0....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at all the documents/evidences were given to the counsel of the assessee and the assessee was totally dependent upon his counsel for representing the matter before the AO but he did not care to attend the proceedings and for his serious lapse, the assessee should not suffer. The assessee for the first time came to know about the additions made by the AO on the receipt of the order of the AO and thereafter the counsel was changed. The affidavit in this regard was also filed before the learned CIT(A). The circumstances, therefore, were beyond the control of the assessee and therefore, assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from producing the documents/evidences before the AO. The assessee produced the necessary evidences before the CIT(A)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....reafter the assessee changed the counsel, this said explanation appears to be bona fide and in our view the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from producing the evidences which were called upon to produce before the AO. Therefore, the learned CIT(A) was not justified in not admitting the additional evidence under r. 46A of the IT Rules, 1962. Moreover, when the application under r. 46A along with documents were sent to the AO and the AO in his letter dt. 7th Nov., 2007 has submitted before the learned CIT(A) that on the basis of evidence filed before the learned CIT(A), the said loans and share application money are verifiable from the books of the assessee, then the learned CIT(A) within his power under sub-r. 4 of r. 46A could di....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....if the appellant files some evidence before him under the pretence of r. 46A(1). The powers of the learned CIT(A) as submitted above are also to be interpreted in the context of the amended law, wherein he is no more empowered to restore back any matter which was earlier under s. 251(1)(a), necessitating a compulsory admission of the evidence before him in the interest of justice. This matter has recently been dealt with elaborately in CIT vs. K. Ravindranathan Nair (2003) 184 CTR (Ker) 46 which has held that the learned CIT(A) was not justified in rejecting the admission of confirmatory letters straightway on the plea that the evidence was not filed before the AO. This ratio squarely applies on the facts of the present case inasmuch as her....