Mr. Devram GenbhauTattu, Pune v. ITO, Pune

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B PUNE BEFORE SHRI I.C. SUDHIR JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1150/PN/2010 (ASSTT. YEAR : 2006-07) MR. DEVRAM G ENBHAU TATTU ... APPELLANT AT POST PARAGAON VIA NARHYANGAON TAL. JUNNER DIST. PUNE PAN : AECPT4681E V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 8(4) PUNE RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI. KISHOR PHADKE RESPONDENT BY : MS. NEERA MALHOTRA DATE OF HEARING : 07-02-2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 30-03-2012 ORDER PER I.C. SUDHIR JM THE ASSESSEE HAS QUESTIONED THE ADDITION OF RS.3 25 000/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF INTRODUCTION OF CAPITAL MADE BY THE A .O. 2. THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT AUTHORIZED REPRESENT ATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE REMAINED ILL DURING THE PERIOD 5.6.2010 TO 10.6.2010 HENCE HE COULD NOT PRESENT THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD CIT(A) AND EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT. HE MOVED AN APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION OF THE TRIBUNAL TO PRODUCE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE BEING 8-A EXTRACTS OF AGRICULTURE LAND AT MAUJE PARGAON TALUKA JUNNAR HELD BY MR. DEVRAM GENBHAU TATTU MR. GENBHAU BHIKAJI TATTU AND MRS. PARVANABA I GENBHAU TATTU. THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO PRODUCE THE SAL E RECEIPTS OF AGRICULTURE PRODUCE AND ENTRIES IN PASS BOOK TO SU BSTANTIATE THE AGRICULTURE RECEIVED. THE 8A EXTRACTS HAS NOT BEE N SUBMITTED EARLIER SINCE THE SAME WAS NOT ASKED BY THE A.O. HOWEVER THE 8-A EXTRACTS ARE CRUCIAL IN DECIDING THE ISSUE. THE LD. A.R. HAS F URNISHED THE 8-A ITA . NO1150/PN/2010 MR. DEVRAM GENBHAU TATTU. A.Y. 2006-07 PAGE OF 3 2 EXTRACTS IN THE FORM OF PAPER BOOK CONTAINING PAGE NOS. 1 TO 3 SUPPORTED WITH MEDICAL CERTIFICATE THAT THE AUTHORIZED REPRE SENTATIVE MR. S.B. AMATE WAS ILL AND WAS UNDER THE TREATMEN T OF THE PHYSICIAN ON 5.6.2010 TO 10.6.2010. 3. THE LD. D.R. OPPOSED THE ABOVE APPLICATION WITH THIS SUBMISSION THAT THE REASON SHOWN IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO ALLOW THE APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE. CONSIDERING THE A BOVE SUBMISSIONS WE FIND THAT THE ILLNESS OF THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTAT IVE DURING THE HEARING OF FIRST APPEAL WAS SUFFICIENT REASON FOR NOT FUR NISHING THE DOCUMENT I.E. 8-A EXTRACTS TO SUPPORT THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE R EGARDING AGRICULTURAL INCOME. WE THUS ALLOW THE APPLICATION WHILE ADMIT TING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE I.E. 8-A EXTRACTS OF AGRICULTURAL LAND HE LD BY THE ABOVE STATED 3 PERSONS AND REMAND THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE LD CIT(A) TO DECIDE THE ISSUES AFRESH IN VIEW OF THESE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AFTER HEARING THE PARTIES. WE WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT ADMISSION OF THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE TRIBU NAL WILL NOT IN ANY MANNER INFLUENCE THE DECISION OF THE LD CIT(A) ON MERITS OF THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. THE GROUND IS THUS ALLOWED FOR STATI STICAL PURPOSES. 4. IN RESULT APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PUR POSES. 5. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON . SD/- SD/- ( D. KARUNAKARA RAO ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( I.C. SUDHIR ) JUDICIAL MEMBER PUNE DATED THE 30TH MARCH 2012 THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30.3. 2012 SD/- SD/- (R.K. PANDA) (I.C. SUDHIR) AM JM ITA . NO1150/PN/2010 MR. DEVRAM GENBHAU TATTU. A.Y. 2006-07 PAGE OF 3 3 US COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT -V PUNE 4. THE CIT(A)-V PUNE 5. THE D.R. B BENCH PUNE 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE