DCIT Vs Virendra Kumar Agrawal Jarway (ITAT Raipur)
ITAT Raipur held that vacating addition/ disallowances by CIT(A) based on additional documentary evidences filed before him without confronting AO is against the provisions of rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. Thus, matter restored back to AO.
Facts- The present appeal is preferred by the revenue mainly on the ground that CIT(Appeals) had vacated the additions/disallowances that were made by the A.O by admitting the “additional documentary evidences” that were produced by the assessee appellant in the course of the proceedings before him without confronting the same to the A.O and calling for his remand report, therefore, the same was in violation of Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962.
Conclusion- Held that that the CIT(Appeals) had vacated the additions/disallowances made by the A.O based on additional documentary evidence that were filed by the assessee appellant before him, which, however, were never confronted to the A.O for necessary examination and rebuttal, restore the matter to his file with a direction to re-decide the same after confronting the said documentary evidence that had been admitted by him at the back of the A.O as required per the mandate of Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962.
