TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (1) TMI 703
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eir prayer to admit two additional grounds. 4. The additional grounds raised by the appellant, the contentions urged and the decision taken thereon are seen from paragraphs 9 and 10 of the order passed by the Tribunal in ITA No.307/09 arising out of assessment for the assessment year 2005-06 and these paragraphs are extracted below for reference; "9. The assessee has moved a petition with a prayer to admit the following additional grounds:- a) whether on law, and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the expenditure incurred by way of payments effected during the year for the buildings that existed on the land acquired for mining and demolished immediately such acquisition to prepare such land acquired for the purpose of mining operations, is allowable as revenue expenditure incurred in the course of mining of essential raw materials u/s.37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961? b) without prejudice to the above, the cost incurred for preparation of land to make it minable, for mining the essential raw materials, incurred under the author....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cer and since expenditure claimed is reflected in the audited accounts, the Tribunal should not have accepted the contention of the revenue that the aforesaid grounds raised for the first time before it could not be entertained since facts relating thereto were not available on record. Counsel sought to substantiate his contentions by referring to the judgment of this Court in C.I.T. v. Kerala State Co-op. Marketing Fed. Ltd (193 ITR 624) and also referred to the Apex Court judgment in C.I.T. v. Nirbheram Daluram [(1997) 10 SCC 373]. 6. On the other hand, learned standing counsel referred us to the admission on behalf of the appellant before the Tribunal as contained in para 9 extracted above that the relevant facts were not available on record. He also relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. C.I.T. {1998 (229) ITR 383} and sought to sustain the order passed by the Tribunal. 7. We have considered the submissions made by both sides. Admittedly, the grounds which were raised by the appellant before the Tribunal and noticed by it in para 9 extracted above and the factual contention in support thereto were not raised before the assessing officer....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er. There is no good reason to justify curtailment of the power of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in entertaining an additional ground raised by the assessee in seeking modification of the order of assessment passed by the Income-tax Officer. This court further observed that there may be several factors justifying the raising of a new plea in an appeal and each case has to be considered on its own facts. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner must be satisfied that the ground raised was bona fide and that the same could not have been raised earlier for good reasons. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner should exercise his discretion in permitting or not permitting the assessee to raise an additional ground in accordance with law and reason. The same observations would apply to appeals before the Tribunal also. The view that the Tribunal is confined only to issues arising out of the appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) takes too narrow a view of the powers of the Appellate Tribunal (vide, e.g., CIT v. Anand Prasad [1981] 128 ITR 388 (Delhi), CIT v. Karamchand Premchand P. Ltd.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... "23. Following the decisions of the Supreme Court cited above and agreeing with the view expressed by the Madras High Court in R.Brahadesswaran's case (supra), we hold that an appellant before the Tribunal could raise any new or additional point for the first time in appeal before the Tribunal even though it had not been raised in any form either before the assessing authority or before the Commissioner (Appeals). We further hold that when once any such new or additional ground is raised before the Tribunal, they are duty bound to entertain that ground and render a decision thereon either themselves or by remanding the matter if further investigation into the facts is necessitated. 24. The Tribunal permitted the assessee to raise the additional ground claiming deduction of the amount accrued as per the Kerala General Sales Tax Act towards purchase tax for pepper. Accepting the contention of the assessee that it was omitted to be claimed before the ITO, the assessee was also found entitled to claim the same since that is a statu....