BHAGCHAND, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee emanates from the order of the ld. CIT(A)-I, Jaipur dated 19/07/2017 for the A.Y. 2012-13, wherein the assessee has taken following grounds of appeal: 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) has factually and legally erred in not admitting the additional evidences under Rule 46A of the I.T. Rules, 1962. This is contrary to the principles of Equity and Natural Justice as these details and evidences go to the root of the point. ITA 725/JP/2017_ Sita Ram Sharma Vs ITO 2

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) has factually and legally erred in exercising the co- terminus powers to invoke provisions of section 68 of thefor making addition on account of the Outstanding Debtors. As per Accountancy Rules, no valid addition can be made u/s 68 of the on account of the undisputed outstanding debtors.

3. On the facts and in the circumstances, the Authorities Below have erred in making addition of Rs.3,19,380/- without appreciating the facts of the case in right perspective. The addition so made is factually and legally incorrect and same deserves to be deleted summarily.

2. At the outset of hearing, the ld AR has submitted that the assessee submitted additional evidences before the ld. CIT(A) as per Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 (in short the Rules) but the same has not been considered by him. He submitted that in the interest of justice and equity, the additional evidences submitted by the assessee may be admitted and matter may be restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer as the factual verification with regard to the sales made by the assessee to the M/s Vijay Laxmi Agro and the payments received in response to that needs verification. Ld. A.R. submitted that the ledger account of M/s Vijay laxmi Agro clearly establishes that the assessee has sold agricultural implements and has received the amount back in various installments, which has been duly reflected in the cash book of the assessee as well as the ledger account ITA 725/JP/2017_ Sita Ram Sharma Vs ITO 3 of M/s Vijay Laxmi Agro. Therefore, on the merits also, this addition deserves to be deleted.

3. On the other hand, the ld Sr.DR has relied on the orders of the authorities below.

4. After hearing both the sides and considering the factual position of the issue, the Bench is of the views that in the interest of justice and equity, the matter needs a relook at the level of the Assessing Officer particularly when the assessee has sold the goods to M/s Vijay Laxmi Agro and the payments has been denied in respect of these sales. Hence, the matter is restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer.

5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only. Order pronounced in the open court on 08/01/2018. Sd/- Hkkxpan (BHAGCHAND) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 08 th January, 2018 *Ranjan vknsk dh izfrfyfi vxzsfkr@Copy of the order forwarded to:

1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Shri Sita Ram Sharma, Jaipur. ITA 725/JP/2017_ Sita Ram Sharma Vs ITO 4

2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The ITO, Ward-3(2), Jaipur.

3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT

4. vk;dj vk;qDrvihy@The CIT(A)

5. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur

6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 725/JP/2017) vknskkuqlkj@ By order, lgk;d iathdkj@Asst. Registrar