Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2012 (9) TMI 119

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....vice". The Assessing Officer after scrutiny made addition of Rs.1,96,70,515/- on account of inflation of expenses on account of labour, addition on account of difference between ESIC payments, addition of Rs.23,19,085/- on account of service Tax payments u/s.43B and Rs.1,50,000/- as unexplained agricultural income. The AO assessed the total income of the assessee at Rs.2,66,46,730/-. The matter was carried before the first appellate authority who confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. Aggrieved with the same, the assessee is in appeal before us. 3. The stand of the assessee is that before the first appellate authority assessee filed additional evidences to substantiate his claim of the expenditure. A Remand Report in response to add....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....examine the evidence or the documents or to examine witness produced by the assessee. On plain reading of all these provision of 46A it is implicitly clear that the first stage is the assessee sought permission to lead additional evidence and once CIT(A) act upon same by calling remand report and thereafter CIT(A) was not justified to refused to admit the additional evidence produced by the assessee. Accordingly order of the CIT(A) was set aside. Following the same reasoning order of the CIT(A) be set aside. 6. On the other hand, Ld.DR for the revenue submitted that the assessee had apathy to the proceedings before the Assessing Officer. So the CIT(A) was justified in reviewing the order of Remand Report in response to the additional evid....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....writing the reasons for its admission. (3) The Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), or as the case may be, the Commissioner (Appeals) shall not take into account any evidence produced under sub-rule (1) unless the Assessing Officer has been allowed a reasonable opportunity - (a) to examine the evidence or document or to crossexamine the witness produced by the appellant, or (b) to produce any evidence or document or any witness in rebuttal of the additional evidence produced by the appellant. (4) Nothing contained in this rule shall affect the power of the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) or, as the case may be, the Commissioner(Appeals) to direct the production of any document, or the examination of any witness, to enable him to dispose of the ....