Tribhuvan Jewellers P.ltd, Mumbai v. Ito 8(3)(2), Mumbai

The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 16.03.2017 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A)] relevant to AY 2008- 09.

2. The assessee has filed various grounds of appeal challenging the order of CIT(A) both on jurisdictional issues and on merits.

3. At the outset, the ld. AR drew the attention of the Bench to the application dated 26.11.2018 wherein the assessee has filed additional evidences under Rule 29 of Appellate Tribunal Rules,

1963. The ld. AR prayed before the Bench that these additional evidences could not be produced before the ld CIT(A) and AO due to several reasons which are beyond the control of the assessee and ITA No.2516/MUM/2017 Tribhuvan Jewellers Ltd. 2 these evidences go to the root of the issues raised by the assessee before this Honble Tribunal. Accordingly, the ld. AR submitted before the Bench that the same may kindly be admitted for adjudication. The la AR requested before the bench to decide the appeal here or alternatively restore to the file of AO. The ld. DR on the other hand submitted that these additional evidences were not filed before the ld. CIT(A) during the appellate or before 6 the AO during assessment proceedings despite adequate opportunities given to the assessee and therefore the assessee has no locus standi to pray before the honble court to admit these additional evidences. The ld DR submitted that accordingly the same kindly be dismissed.

4. After hearing both the parties and perusing the materials available on record, we observe that the additional evidences filed by the assessee has bearing on the issues as raised before us. These evidences were not filed before the authorities below in the assessment as well as appellate proceedings. Accordingly, in the interest of justice and fair play, we are of the view that the matter be restored to the file of AO for proper appreciation of these evidences so that the appeal of the assessee could be decided on merits as per facts and law. We, therefore, restore the appeal to the AO with the direction to decide the same as per facts and law after affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity.

5. The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 30.01.2020. Sd/- Sd/- (Ram Lal Negi) (Rajesh Kumar) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai, Dated: 30.01.2020. RS, Sr. P.S. ITA No.2516/MUM/2017 Tribhuvan Jewellers Ltd. 3 Copy to: The Appellant The Respondent The CIT, Concerned, Mumbai The CIT (A) Concerned, Mumbai The DR Concerned Bench //True Copy// [ By Order Dy/Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, Mumbai. Date Initial WHETHER DICTATION PAD ENCLOSED WITH THE FILE : Yes/No (as the order has been typed with the help of manuscript)

1. Draft dictated on Sr.PS

2. Draft placed before author Sr.PS

3. Draft proposed & placed before the second member JM/AM

4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member JM/AM

5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Sr.PS

6. Date of pronouncement Sr.PS

7. File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS

8. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk

9. Date of dispatch of Order