2013 (7) TMI 548

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....71 (1)(c). Thus, both appeals are pertaining to the quantum and penalty respectively. On 23.03.2009, a co-ordinate Bench of this Court has admitted the quantum appeal on the following substantial questions of law:- I. Whether the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has erred in law in setting aside the issue of bogus capital gains to the file of the Assessing Officer even though the entire material required for deciding the same was available on record. II. Whether the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has erred in law in admitting additional evidence on the basis of a bald statement that the said evidence goes to the root of the issue under consideration. III. Whether the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has erred in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....g brief of Sri S.K.Garg, learned counsel for the assessee and gone through the material available on record. From the record, it appears that in the year 2008, the Tribunal has remanded the matter back to the A.O., as the fresh evidence was admitted by the Tribunal. It may be mentioned that Rule 46-A of the Income Tax Rules provides that:- 46A. [Production of additional evidence before the [Deputy Commissioner (Appeals)] [ and Commissioner (Appeals)] (1) The appellant shall not be entitled to produce before the [Deputy Commissioner (Appeals)] [or, as the case may be, the Commissioner (Appeals)], any evidence, whether oral or documentary, other than the evidence produced by him during the course of proceedings before the [Assessi....