Discretion lies with the Tribunal to admit additional evidence in the interest of justice

CIT Vs Text Hundred India Pvt. Ltd. (Delhi High Court)-  Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules – Additional evidence should be allowed to be submitted at the Tribunal to prove benefit received by receipt of management services by the Assessee. AO denied deduction of management services charges alleging that the same didn’t provide benefits to the recipient of services.

The Assessee sought production of evidences in the form of emails to prove benefits from such services. The Department challenged production of additional evidences. Held, discretion lies with the Tribunal to admit additional evidence in the interest of justice once the Tribunal affirms the opinion that doing so would be necessary for proper adjudication of the matter.

Once it is found that the party intending to lead evidence before the Tribunal for the first time was prevented by sufficient cause to lead such an evidence and that this evidence would have material bearing on the issue which needs to be decided by the Tribunal and ends of justice demand admission of such an evidence, the Tribunal can pass an order to that effect.

The reason of non-retrieving of e-mails due to technical difficulties for a period of almost 3 years before the lower authorities is a sufficient cause for the purpose of admitting fresh evidence as per Rule 29 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.