The Income tax Officer,,Ward-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad v. M/s. Kanak Castor Products Pvt. Ltd.,, Ahmedabad

ITA 1715/AHD/2019 | 2008-2009
Pronouncement Date: 09-11-2021 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 171520514 RSA 2019
Bench Ahmedabad
Appeal Number ITA 1715/AHD/2019
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 26 day(s)
Appellant The Income tax Officer,,Ward-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad
Respondent M/s. Kanak Castor Products Pvt. Ltd.,, Ahmedabad
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 09-11-2021
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted A
Assessment Year 2008-2009
Appeal Filed On 14-11-2019
Judgment Text
ITA No.1715/Ahd/2019 AY 2008-09 1 आयकर आयकरआयकर आयकर अपी अपीअपी अपीलीय लीयलीय लीय अिधकरण अिधकरणअिधकरण अिधकरण अहमदाबाद अहमदाबादअहमदाबाद अहमदाबाद यायपीठ यायपीठयायपीठ यायपीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘’A’’ BENCH AHMEDABAD (CONDUCTED THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT AT AHMEDABAD) BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1715/Ahd/2019 Asst.Year : 2008-09 The ITO Wd-2(1)(2) Ahmedabad Vs. M/s.Kanak Castor Products Pvt.Ltd. Darshak 14/A Swastik Society Punjabi Hall Lane Navrangpura Ahmedabad Revenue by : Shri R.R. Makwana Sr. DR Assessee by : Shri Hemanshu Shah AR सुनवाई क तारीख/Date of Hearing : 27/08/2021 घोषणा क तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 10/11/2021 आदेश आदेशआदेश आदेश/O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the Revenue against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2 Ahmedabad of even date 13/08/2019 (in short “Ld. CIT(A)”) arising in the matter of assessment order passed under s. 144 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961 (here-in-after referred to as the Act ) relevant to the Assessment Year 2008-2009. 2. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal: ITA No.1715/Ahd/2019 AY 2008-09 2 1. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the following disallowances made by the Assessing Officer without considering the factual observations made by the Assessing Officer in the remand report: 1. (i) Disallowance of 30% of labour expenses of Rs.25 68 128/-. 1. (ii) Disallowance of 25% of freight inward expenses of Rs.48 62 129/-. 1.(iii) Disallowance of 25% of freight outward expenses of Rs.20 69 876/- 1.(iv) Disallowance of 25% of loading and unloading expenses of Rs.8 77 735/-. 1.(v) Disallowance of 25% of stores and spares expenses of Rs.25 67 185/-. 1.(vi) Disallowance of testing charges of Rs.12 74 532/-. 1.(vii) Disallowance of bank commission and bank guarantee expenses of Rs.2 00 000/- 1.(viii) Disallowance of 25% of packing expenses of Rs.2 67 092/-. 1.(ix) Disallowance of Rs.3 58 636/- out of brokerage expenses. 1.(x) Disallowance of depreciation of Rs.47 70 928/-. 2. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in admitting the additional evidences in violation of conditions specified in Rule 46A without appreciating the fact that during the course of assessment proceeding ample opportunities were given the Assessing Officer to produce the evidences and even during remand proceedings the A.O. did not find the additional evidences submitted by the assessee as convincing and conclusive. 3. The appellant craves leave to amend alter any ground or add a new ground which may be necessary. 3. The only interconnected issue raised by the Revenue is that the learned CIT (A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1 98 16 281/- made by the AO on the reasoning that the expenses were not incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the business. 4. The facts in brief are that the assessee in the present case is a private limited company and engaged in the business of manufacturing processing and trading of castor oil and other related products. The assessee for the year under consideration filed its return of income declaring loss of Rs. 6 17 50 097/- only. The assessee revised its return of income time to time and finally declared the loss of Rs. 5 86 29 312/- in the return revised dated 09 th May 2010. ITA No.1715/Ahd/2019 AY 2008-09 3 5. The AO during the assessment proceedings required the assessee to furnish the necessary details by issuing show cause notice time and again but the assessee failed to furnish the same. However the assessee in response to the final show cause notice issued by the AO submitted certain details vide letter 22 nd December 2011 which was filed on 27-12-2011 at the fag end of the assessment. The details furnished by the assessee are given as under: “1. Reply of Para (b) of your letter Details of labour expenses for Rs.85 60 426/- alongwith name and address of Parties are enclosed marked Annexure-P 2. Copy of acknowledgement receipt of TDS returns (From No.26Q) for current Asst.Year 2008-09 are enclosed marked Annexure-Q. Labour charges of Rs.21 997/- and brokerage of Rs.4 26 170/- aggregating of Rs.4 48 167/- was Disallowed u/s.40(a)(ia) of I.T.Act. In return of income. 3. Reply of Para (c) of your letter Details of following expenses for current Asstt.Year 2008-09 are enclosed marked. Annexure-R. 1&9. Details of freight and freight outward alongwith name and address of Parties are enclosed. 2. Details of Loading/unloading expenses alongwith name and address of parties are enclosed. 3. Details of Shares and spares alongwith name and address of parties are enclosed. 4. Details of Packing materials alongwith name and address of parties are enclosed. 5. Details of Electricity expenses alongwith copy of bills are enclosed. 6. Details of Storage rent expenses alongwith copy of bills are enclosed. ITA No.1715/Ahd/2019 AY 2008-09 4 7. Details of Brokerage alongwith bills are enclosed. 8. Details of Professional fees & Consultation expense alongwith name & address of parties. Copy of bills are enclosed. 10.Details of Testing charges alongiwth bills are enclosed. 11. Details of Bank commission are enclosed. 12. Details of Excise expenses are enclosed. 13. Details of Inspection Fee alongwith bills are enclosed. 14. Export commission of Rs.2 77 961/- paid to I.T.C.Ltd. 207/215 High Street Orpington Kent BRS OPF. 15. Details of Other expenses alongwith R.T.O. expenses are enclosed. 3. Reply of Para (d) of your letter Copy of bills for addition to fixed assets for current Asst.Year 2008- 09 are enclosed marked Annexure-S” 5.1 However the AO was not satisfied with the submission of the assessee on the reasoning that the assessee has not furnished adequate details for the necessary verification. As such the details furnished by the assessee were containing the copies of the ledgers along with the name of parties. But there was no detail about the amount which were paid to the different parties. 5.2 The AO likewise further noted that the assessee has filed the copies of the invoices/bills in support of brokerage expenses of the earlier year. Accordingly the AO disregarded the contention of the assessee and made the disallowance of different expenses claimed by the assessee on ad hoc basis/estimated basis in the manner as detailed below: Labour charges freight inward expenses freight outward expenses loading unloading expenses stores and spares and packing materials. ITA No.1715/Ahd/2019 AY 2008-09 5 5.3 The AO found that the assessee has not filed complete details and associated evidences in support of genuineness of expenses to justify that these were incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the business. As such the assessee only submitted the list of names of persons to whom amount was paid against alleged expenses. But no detail was given that of how much amount was paid to the specific person. Likewise no PAN or other detail was submitted of the person to whom amount was paid. Accordingly the AO in the absence of adequate supporting documents held that the genuineness of the expenses have not been proven completely. Thus the AO disallowed part expenses in the following manner: i. Labour charges Rs. 25 68 128/- being 30% of total amount claimed ii. Freight inward exp. Rs. 48 62 169/- being 25% of total amount claimed iii. Freight outward exp. Rs. 20 69 876/- being 25% of total amount claimed iv. Loading unloading exp. Rs. 8 77 735/- being 25% of total amount claimed v. Stores and spares exp. Rs. 25 67 185 being 25% of total amount claimed vi. Packing material exp. Rs. 2 67 092/- being 25% of total amount claimed Testing Charges 5.4 The AO found that the assessee during the year has claimed testing charges of 12 74 532/- but there was no such expense claimed in the immediate previous year though export sales were made in both the years. Further the assessee failed to furnish any supporting document despite being asked specific question. Thus the AO in absence of supporting documents disallowed the claim and added to the total income of the assessee. Bank Commission & Guarantee Exp. 5.5 The assessee during the year under consideration claimed bank commission & guarantee charges of Rs. 5 59 909/- and Rs. 8 99 262/- respectively. The AO found that the assessee has not furnished bank book or bank statement or any other supporting documents. Therefore the AO held that the impugned expenses cannot be accepted in totality without cross verification. Thus the AO disallowed part expenses of Rs. 2 00 000/- and added the same to total income of the assessee. ITA No.1715/Ahd/2019 AY 2008-09 6 Brokerage Expenses 5.6 The assessee in the year under consideration claimed the brokerage expense of Rs. 4 48 168/- only. The AO from the note to accounts attached with the financial statement found that an amount of Rs. 3 28 797/- is prior period expenses thus he disallowed the same. Similarly the AO found that the genuineness of remaining expense of Rs. 1 19 376/- was also not proven as the assessee failed to furnished necessary document and evidences. Thus the AO disallowed 25% of the remaining amount i.e. 29 844/- only aggregating to Rs. 3 58 636/- and added the same to the total income of the assessee. Depreciation 5.7 The AO found that the assessee during the year has made an addition of Rs. 2 53 35 712/- to the fixed assets and claimed depreciation and additional depreciation of Rs. 24 04 744/- and Rs. 23 66 184/- respectively. However the assessee failed to submit necessary document to prove the genuineness of the addition of fixed assets. Thus the AO disallowed the depreciation as well as additional depreciation aggregating to Rs. 47 70 928/- and added to the total income of the assessee. 5.8 In view of the above the AO made the addition of various expenses as discussed above aggregating to Rs. 1 98 16 281/- to the total income of the assessee vide order dated 29 th December 2010. 6. The assessee being aggrieved preferred an appeal to the learned CIT (A) and filed certain additional documents which were forwarded to the AO for the remand report. 6.1 The AO vide remand report dated 24 th August 2018 submitted that the assessee deliberately has not submitted required document/ evidences till fag end of assessment proceeding despite issuing several notices. Thus the same were not verified due non availability of time. The AO further submitted that the additional document is nothing but same set of documents which were submitted during ITA No.1715/Ahd/2019 AY 2008-09 7 assessment proceeding which were furnished just before the expiry of the time for the assessment proceedings. However on verification of the same during remand proceeding it was found that no supporting evidence was filed such as whether the payment was made in cash or through banking channel bank book cash book vouchers TDS details etc. Hence the same cannot be accepted. 6.2 The assessee in rejoinder submitted that all the payments were made through banking channel. The assessee also claimed that the ledger copies of the parties along their name addresses and cheque detail were already submitted. Therefore the finding of the AO to this extent is incorrect. The assessee also claimed that detail of TDS returns were also furnished before the AO during assessment proceedings. The assessee further claimed that it has submitted bank book and bank statement vide letter dated 19 th June 2012 during appellate proceeding and also during assessment proceeding vide submission dated 12 th October 2010. Similarly the assessee contended that it has also filed the copies of the invoices/bills for the purchase of fixed assets for more than 80% of assets during assessment proceeding as well appellate proceeding. With respect to cash book the assessee submitted that the AO never asked for cash book. Hence the same was not submitted. 7. The learned CIT(A) after considering submission of the assessee and remand report of the AO admitted the additional evidences and proceeded to decide individual additions made by the AO of various expenses. The finding of the learned CIT(A) is given in the following paragraph. Labour charges freight inward expenses freight outward expenses loading unloading expenses stores and spares and packing material. 7.1 The CIT(A) observed that the assessee has furnished the necessary bills and genuineness of the payments and duly recorded the expenses in the books of accounts. Thus the learned CIT(A) held that in such circumstances the ad-hoc disallowances of the expenses are not tenable and directed the AO to delete the same. Testing Charges ITA No.1715/Ahd/2019 AY 2008-09 8 7.2 The learned CIT(A) observed that the AO has disallowed testing charges on account non availability of supporting document. However during appellate proceeding the assessee has furnished relevant ledger and supporting document establishing correctness of the expenses. Hence the ld. CIT-A directed the AO to delete the addition made by him. Bank Commission and Guarantee expenses: 7.3 The learned CIT (A) held that the assessee has submitted bank details during assessment proceeding as well as during appellate proceeding. Thus adhoc disallowances of Rs. 2 lakh out of expenditure paid to bank is not sustainable. Accordingly the ld. CIT-A directed the AO to delete the addition made by him. Brokerage Expenses: 7.4 The learned CIT (A) found that addition of the brokerage expenses of Rs. 3 28 792/- was made on account of prior period expenses and 25% of remaining expense on account of non-availability of the supporting evidence. However the assessee in suo- moto has disallowed the same in the revised return of income for Rs. 4 48 168/- only. Therefore further disallowance is not required. Depreciation: 7.5 The learned CIT(A) held that the majority of the bills with respect to the addition of assets were duly submitted by the assessee. Hence the disallowance of depreciation is not justified and accordingly the ld. CIT-A directed the AO to delete the addition made by him. 8. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A) the Revenue is in appeal before us. 8.1 The learned DR before us contended that the necessary supporting documents were not furnished by the assessee even during the remand proceedings. 8.2 On the contrary the learned AR before us filed paper book running from the pages 1 to 732 and submitted that all the details in support of the expenses were ITA No.1715/Ahd/2019 AY 2008-09 9 duly furnished before the authorities below. For this purpose the learned AR drew our attention on the ledgers of Labour expenses party wise ledger with the name and addresses details of TDS which are placed on pages 45 to 109 and 706 to 710 of the paper book. 8.3 The learned AR also drew our attention on the details of freight inward expenses freight outward expenses loading and unloading expenses stores and spares expenses and packing expenses which are placed on record in the paper book. 8.4 The learned AR with respect to bank guarantee expenses and bank commission expenses filed the copy of the ledger along with the bank statements which are placed on pages 250 to 478 of the paper book. 8.5 The learned AR with respect to the brokerage expenses contended that the same was disallowed in the revised computation of income therefore there cannot be any further disallowance of such expenses. The learned AR for this purpose drew our attention on the revised return of income which is placed on record. 8.6 The learned AR with respect to the addition of fixed assets submitted that the majority of bills for the purchase of the fixed assets were filed which are placed on pages 536 to 651 and 673 to 674 of the paper book. 8.7 Both the learned DR and the AR before us vehemently supported the order of the authorities below as favourable to them. 9. We have heard the contentions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. From the preceding discussion we note that it was alleged by the AO that the assessee has not furnished the requisite details in support of various expenses. Thus the AO in the absence of such details has made the disallowance of various expenses on ad hoc basis. The list of such expenses reads as under: i. Labour charges ii. Freight inward expenses iii. Freight outward expenses ITA No.1715/Ahd/2019 AY 2008-09 10 iv. Loading and unloading expenses v. Stores and spares expenses vi. Packing material expenses. 9.1 However the learned CIT (A) was pleased to delete the addition made by the AO on the reasoning that the assessee has furnished all the requisite details in support of the expenses. 9.2 Admittedly the necessary details in support of the expenses were filed by the assessee at the fag end of the assessment proceedings. Accordingly the AO in his remand report dated 24 th April 2018 has categorically admitted the fact that such details filed by the assessee were not verified due to shortage of time. The AO in his remand report has made reference to the details filed by the assessee on 27 th December 2010 vide letter dated 22 nd December 2010. 9.3 However we find that the assessee has also filed additional submissions before the AO vide letter dated 29 th of December 2010 which has not been referred by the AO in the remand report. Indeed the assessment order was passed by the AO dated 29 th December 2010. Hence it was not possible for the AO to consider the details furnished by the assessee at the fag and of the assessment proceedings. 9.4 Be that as may be all the above details filed by the assessee vide letter dated 22 December 2010 and 29 th of December 2010 were also submitted before learned CIT (A) vide submission dated 19 th June 2012 which were duly forwarded by the learned CIT (A) for the remand report. But the details filed by the assessee dated 29 th December 2010 has not been referred by the AO in the remand report. 9.5 On perusal of the remand report of the AO dated 24 th April 2018 we note that the AO has made the disallowance of the expenses for various reasons. One of the reason was that the details were not furnished by the assessee whether the expenses were paid through the banking channel or in cash. We disagree with the finding of the AO for the reason that the assessee has duly furnished the copies of the expenses ledgers and the ledger of all the parties to whom the payments of such expenses were made which are placed on paper book as detailed below: ITA No.1715/Ahd/2019 AY 2008-09 11 1. Ledger copies of parties to whom labour charges were paid are placed on pages 55 to 109 of paper book. 2. Ledger copies of parties to whom freight inward and outward expenses were paid are placed on pages 132 to 172 of paper book. 3. Ledger copies of parties to whom loading unloading charges were paid are placed on pages 176 to 191 of paper book. 4. Ledger copies of parties to whom packing material expenses were paid are placed on pages 664 to 672 of paper book. 5. Detail of consumption of stores and spares and name of the parties with address at page 192 to 206 of the paper book. 9.6 The party wise ledgers contains the details of the mode of payment which is through banking channel. Similarly the assessee has also filed the copy of the bank statement which is placed on pages 251 to 438 of the paper book. Likewise there were addresses furnished by the assessee of all the parties to whom the payment was made against the expenses. However the AO has not verified from any of the party despite having the power under the statute under the provisions of section 131(1)/133(6) of the Act. 9.7 The 2 nd allegation of the AO was that the assessee has not furnished the details of the TDS. However on perusal of the paper book filed by the assessee particularly pages 693 to 724 we note that the assessee has furnished details of TDS deducted and the copies of the TDS return acknowledgment. 9.8 The 3 rd and the 4 th allegation of the AO was that the assessee has not furnished the bills of the parties as well as the copies of the vouchers for payment. Indeed it was the onus of the assessee to furnish the requisite details as desired by the AO. On perusal of the paper book we also note that such details were not furnished by the assessee. However in our considered view in the absence of such details there cannot be any disallowance of the expenses. It is for the reason that the AO was provided the addresses of the parties to whom the payment was made their ledger accounts showing the amount was paid through the banking channel ITA No.1715/Ahd/2019 AY 2008-09 12 after the deducting the TDS against such exp.nses. If the AO had any doubt on the genuineness of the expenses in the absence of the bills and vouchers the AO was very much empowered to call for the details from the respective parties. But he has not done so. Moreover there were other details which were available on record wherein no defect was pointed out by the AO. Thus in our considered view there cannot be any disallowance of the expenses in the given facts and circumstances in ad hoc manner. 9.9 The next allegation ( No. 5 and 6) was that the assessee failed to furnish the copy of the bank book and the bank statement. In this regard we find that the assessee was maintaining 7 bank accounts and has filed the copies of all the bank statement which are available on pages 251 to 438 of the paper book. Likewise the assessee before learned CIT(A) in rejoinder to remand report claimed that it has furnished bank book during assessment proceeding vide letter dated 12 th October 2010 but the same not controverted by DR. Thus to this extent we disagree with the comments of the AO in the remand report. 9.10 With respect to the cash book the learned AR before us contended that the copy of the cash book was never demanded by the AO during the assessment proceedings. Accordingly the assessee has not furnished the same. This contention of the learned AR was not controverted by the learned DR at the time of hearing. Accordingly we note that the assessee cannot be penalized on account of non- furnishing the cash book in the given facts and circumstances. 9.11 Besides the above we also note that the assessee has also made rectification application under section 154 of the Act vide letter Ref: Kanak/154/2008- 09/3012/01-11 dated 19 th January 2011 requesting the AO to consider the necessary details filed in the application dated 29 th of December 2010. The copy of the rectification application is placed on pages 110 to 115 of the paper book. Therefore we can safely assume that the necessary details were available with the AO during the remand proceedings. But the AO has not taken the same into consideration while filing the remand report to the learned CIT (A). ITA No.1715/Ahd/2019 AY 2008-09 13 9.12 Coming to the disallowance of testing charges of ₹ 12 74 532.00 in this connection we note that the assessee has filed the necessary details of such expenses. The details include the ledger copies of the parties and the major bills issued by the parties which are placed on pages 207 to 249 of the paper book. The AO has not pointed out any defect in the details furnished by the assessee. In the event the AO had any doubt on the genuineness of such expenses he was empowered under section 133 (6)/131 of the Act to carry out the necessary verification. But he has not done so. 9.13 Coming to the ad hoc disallowance of Rs. 2 lacs towards bank commission/bank guarantee expenses in this regard we note that the assessee has furnished the copies of the ledger of such expenses which is placed on pages 439 to 478 of the paper book. The assessee in support of its expenses has also filed the bank statements which are placed on pages 251 to 438 of the paper book. The details of such expenses were very much available during the remand proceedings before the AO. Therefore the same cannot be disallowed on adhoc basis. 9.14 Coming to the disallowance of brokerage expenses of ₹ 3 58 636/- in this connection we note that the assessee in the revised return of income has already made the disallowance of brokerage expenses on account of non-deduction of taxes. In other words the assessee has claimed brokerage expenses of ₹ 4 48 167/- which were disallowed by the assessee suo-moto in its revised return of income. Therefore any further disallowance will lead to the double addition to the total income of the assessee. The assessee has filed the necessary details showing the amount of disallowance of the impugned expenses which is placed on pages 6 of the paper book. However the question arises that the assessee in the subsequent year can claim the deduction of such expenses after complying the provisions of TDS whereas the disallowance has been made by the AO for the impugned expenses on account of 2 reasons namely prior period expenses and secondly non-availability of supporting evidence. As regards the prior period expenses we note that the courts have taken the view that prior period expense cannot be disallowed as there is no effect on the tax liability of the assessee. In holding so we draw support and ITA No.1715/Ahd/2019 AY 2008-09 14 guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of CIT vs. Nagri Mills Co. Ltd. reported in 33 ITR 681 where the Hon’ble court held as under: “We have often wondered why the Income-tax authorities in a matter such as this where the deduction is obviously a permissible deduction under the Income-tax Act raise disputes as to the year in which the deduction should be allowed. The question as to the year in which a deduction is allowable may be material when the rate of tax chargeable on the assessee in two different years is different; but in the case of income of a company tax is attracted at a uniform rate and whether the deduction in respect of bonus was granted in the assessment year 1952-53 or in the assessment year corresponding to the accounting year 1952 that is in the assessment year 1953-54 should be a matter of no consequence to the Department; and one should have thought that the Department would not fritter away its energies in fighting matters of this kind. But obviously judging from the references that come up to us every now and then the Department appears to delight in raising points of the character which do not affect the taxability of the assessee or the tax that the Department is likely to collect from him whether in one year or the other. “ 9.15 As regards the genuineness of the expenses incurred by the assessee in the under consideration we note that all the necessary details along with the bills were filed by the assessee which are placed on pages-515 to 533 of the paper book along with the copy of the ledger. But the AO has not doubted on the genuineness of such details filed by the assessee. Thus we are of the view that the impugned expenses incurred by the assessee were genuine. However the same cannot be allowed in the under consideration for the reason that the assessee failed to deduct the TDS in the year under consideration. 9.16 Coming to the disallowance of depreciation of ₹ 47 70 098/- in this regard we note that the assessee has furnished the details of the bills of the major assets which are placed on pages 536 to 651 and 673 to 674 of the paper book. However no defect of whatsoever has been pointed out by the AO in these details. Accordingly we are of the view that there cannot be any disallowance of depreciation as alleged by the AO. ITA No.1715/Ahd/2019 AY 2008-09 15 9.17 The learned DR at the time of hearing has not brought anything on record contrary to the finding of the learned CIT (A). In view of the above and after considering the facts in totality we do not find any reason to interfere in the finding of the learned CIT (A). Accordingly we uphold the same. Hence the ground of appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. 9.18 Moving further we also note that the Revenue in the ground of appeal has also challenged the fact that the learned CIT (A) has admitted the additional evidences in contravention to the provisions of rule 46A of income tax rule. In this regard we refer subsection 4 and 5 of section 250 of the Act which reads as under: (4) The Commissioner (Appeals) may before disposing of any appeal make such further inquiry as he thinks fit or may direct the Assessing Officer to make further inquiry and report the result of the same to the Commissioner (Appeals). (5) The Commissioner (Appeals) may at the hearing of an appeal allow the appellant to go into any ground of appeal not specified in the grounds of appeal if the Commissioner (Appeals) is satisfied that the omission of that ground from the form of appeal was not wilful or unreasonable. 9.19 We also refer sub rule 4 of rule 46A of the income tax rule which reads as under: (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 penalty under section 271.] 9.20 On perusal of the above provisions we note that the learned CIT (A) has been empowered to admit the additional evidences. In the present case the learned CIT (A) has exercised his power granted to him under section 250 of the Act and sub rule 4 of rule 46A of Income Tax Rule and therefore has admitted the additional ITA No.1715/Ahd/2019 AY 2008-09 16 evidences. Thus we do not find any merit in the ground of appeal raised by the Revenue. Hence we dismiss the same. 10. In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed. Order pronounced in the Court on 10/11/2021 at Ahmedabad. S Sd/-SSSSSSSSSS S Sd/- (RAJPAL YADAV) VICE PRESIDENT (WASEEM AHMED) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (True Copy) Ahmedabad; Dated 10/11/2021 TC Nair आदेश आदेशआदेश आदेश क कक क ितिलिप ितिलिपितिलिप ितिलिप अ ेिषत अ ेिषतअ ेिषत अ ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant 2.  यथ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु (अपील) / The CIT(A) 5. िवभागीय ितिनिध आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण / DR ITAT 6. गाड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसारआदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER उप उपउप उप/सहायक सहायकसहायक सहायक पंजीकार पंजीकारपंजीकार पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकर आयकरआयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीयअपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरणअिधकरण अिधकरण अहमदाबाद अहमदाबादअहमदाबाद अहमदाबाद / ITAT Ahmedabad