TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (10) TMI 755
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2004-05 That the Assessing Officer as well as the learned CIT(A), Meerut have erred the addition of Rs.3,10,000/- as creditor in spite of the confirmation from the creditors." 2. At the outset, none appeared before us on behalf of the assessee nor submitted any request for adjournment. Considering the nature of issue, the Bench proceeded to dispose of the appeal after hearing the ld. DR. 3. Facts, in brief, as per relevant orders for the AY 2003-04 are that return declaring income of Rs.7,03,365/- filed on 28th November, 2003 by the assessee, was processed u/s 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Subsequently, the assessment was reopened u/s 148 of the Act on the ground that total sales in the t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the confirmation was not proved. The AR in his rejoinder has stated that too short a notice was given to the creditor for compliance and in any case if the notice u/s 133(6) was not complied, the Assessing Officer should have issued summon u/s 131. 5.3 Decision and reasons therefore: I have considered the facts of the case. I find that from the assessment proceedings till the remand proceedings the AR has not been able to convince the Assessing Officer about the genuineness of the sundry creditor, namely M/s Gupta Traders. A copy of confirmation filed in the course of appellate proceedings does not have the PIN code of M/s Gupta Traders. The alleged creditor has also not mentioned his PAN etc. The AR has taken no further ini....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ve the PIN code of M/s Shri Krishna Traders. The alleged creditor has also not mentioned his PAN etc. The AR has taken no further initiative to furnish a copy of accounts of the creditor showing the details of transaction or to produce the creditor either before the Assessing Officer or before me. In view of the totality of these facts, I infer that the creditor was rightly held as not being genuine by the Assessing Officer. The addition made, therefore, is upheld." 5. The assessee is now in appeal against the aforesaid findings of learned CIT(A). The ld. DR merely supported the findings of the ld. CIT(A). 6. We have heard the ld. DR and have gone through the facts of the case. The AO added the amount of Rs.1,19,488/- in the AY 2003-0....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... law under which these amounts could be added ,have been referred to. The ld. CIT(A) did not care to record any reasons before admitting additional evidence nor appears to have ascertained the genuineness of the said evidence through independent enquiries or through the AO . Now what are the reasons given in the application for admission of additional evidence, is not evident from the impugned orders. In nutshell, the ld. CIT(A) upheld the addition without following the procedure laid down under Rule 46A of the IT Rules,1962. The ld. CIT(A) arrived at his conclusions without ascertaining as to whether or not the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from submitting the aforesaid additional documents/information before the AO as per pro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....reasonable opportunity (a) to examine the evidence or document or to cross-examine 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 appeal, or for any other substantial cause including the enhancement of the assessment or penalty (whether on his own motion or on the request of the Assessing Officer) under clause (a) of sub section (1) of section 251 or the imposition of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fore additional evidence is admitted and every procedural requirement mentioned in the Rule has to be strictly complied with so that the Rule is meaningfully exercised. Once the assessee invokes Rule 46A and prays for admission of additional evidence before the CIT (A), then the procedure prescribed in the said rule has to be scrupulously followed. A distinction should be recognized and maintained between a case where the assessee invokes Rule 46A to adduce additional evidence before the CIT (A) and a case where the CIT (A), without being prompted by the assessee, while dealing with the appeal, considers it fit to cause or make a further enquiry by virtue of the powers vested in him under sub- Section (4) of Section 250. It is only when he ....