TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (1) TMI 1486
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng regarding the non admission of additional evidence despite the fact that the additional evidence was forwarded to the AO for his comments and the same is deemed to be admitted. The additional evidence has not been admitted only on account of the technical reason that there is no request for admission of additional evidence. Thus, the finding of the CIT(A) is against the principles of natural justice. 3. That the ld. CIT(A) erred on facts and law in dismissing the grounds of appeal pertaining to addition of Rs.1,00,000/- made by the AO on account of unexplained credit. The evidence filed during the course of appellate proceedings has been ignored. 4. That the ld. CIT(A) erred on facts and law in dismissing the grounds of appeal pertai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the same. b) The assessee was prevented from furnishing such information/evidence. c) The assessee was having sufficient cause in furnishing the evidence before the then AO at the time of assessment proceedings. d) The AO has made the order the appealed against without giving sufficient opportunity to the assessee. 1.3. The ld. A/R of the assessee has not come forward with any explanation or reasons for non production of the evidence before the AO except that the mental affairs of the assessee was not in a position to respond to the various dates fixed for hearing but no evidence to prove the same has been furnished. There is no request for admission of additional evidence. It is settled law that the assessee is not entitled to prod....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... account of M/s. Singhal Transport Co. Killanwala in the books of the assessee for the period from 01.04.2007 to 31.03.2008, copy of account of Mrs. Poonam Garg in the books of the assessee for the period from 01.04.2007 to 31.03.2008 and interest account for the period from 01.04.2007 to 31.03.2008. Copies of these documents as well as the assessee's written submissions as had been filed before the ld. CIT(A) are in the assessee's paper book filed before me. 6. The ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted that the ld. CIT(A), vide letter No.165, dated 17/21.05.2013 (APB-16), sent the assessee's aforesaid written submissions and evidence to the AO, seeking his verification and comments thereon; that vide letter No.582-83, dated 08.07.201....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... therefore, the ld. CIT(A) has correctly refused to admit such additional evidence. 9. The facts being not in dispute, it is to be seen as to whether or not, the ld. CIT(A), in the light of Rule 46(A) of the Rules and "Shahrukh Khan" (supra), erred in refusing to admit the additional evidence filed by the assessee. 10. Rule 46A (relevant portion of the Rule) is as under: "Production of additional evidence before the Deputy Commissioner(Appeals and Commissioner (Appeals) 46A. (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 befo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o account the additional evidence only on allowing reasonable opportunity to the AO, inter-alia, to examine the evidence. 13. Herein, the ld. CIT(A) did not record any reason for admitting the additional evidence filed by the assessee. Rather, he, directly, vide letter No. CIT(A)/BTI/13-14/165 dated 17/21.05.2013 (APB-16), called for the AO's verification and comments thereon. However, by virtue of the impugned order, the ld. CIT(A) refused to admit the additional evidence and rejected the same. 14. Now, in "Shahrukh Khan" (supra), under similar circumstances, the Tribunal found from the record that it was not discernible whether the ld. CIT(A) had granted permission to adduce additional evidence by recording reasons in writing under Rule....