Rahul Mittal vs ITO

PER C.N. PRASAD, J.M.

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dated 22.05.2025 for the A.Y. 2015-16.

Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that the assessee has filed application under Rule 29 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 for admission of additional evidences. Ld. Counsel referring to additional evidences submitted that these additional evidences which go to the root of the matter and have direct bearing on the issues involved in the present appeal particularly with regard to the alleged unexplained investment and additions made under section 69 of the Act and section 56(2)(vii) of the Act.

Ld. Counsel submitted that this appeal is arising out of the consequential assessment order passed giving effect to the order passed by the Ld. PCIT u/s.263 of the Act. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that in course of original assessment proceedings the assessee had explained sources of cash payment which was a primarily contributed by assessee’s brother who was co-applicant in the property. Ld. Counsel submits that the assessee was under bonafide belief that documents/explanations already placed on record during the original assessment proceedings formed part of the assessment record and would automatically be available and considered during the fresh assessment proceedings as well as appellate proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A).

Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that the said documents / materials are necessary for proper adjudication of the issues involved in the present appeal and their consideration is essential for arriving at the correct factual understanding and for rendering substantial justice.

Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee had no intention whatsoever to withhold such evidences and non production of the said documents during the fresh assessment proceedings occurred due to bonafide reasons. Therefore, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that these additional evidences may be admitted and restored to the file of the Ld. AO for fresh adjudication after providing an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

The Ld. DR has no serious objection in restoring the issues to the file of the AO.

Heard rival contentions and perused the orders of the authorities below, the materials based before us by way of additional evidences which go to the root of the matter. In the interest of justice we admit the additional evidences by allowing the application of the Assessee. Accordingly, we restore all the issues in appeal alognwith additional evidences to the file of the AO for making assessment afresh after considering the additional evidences and providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.