ACIT Vs Haris Muhammad Sait (ITAT Bangalore)
ITAT remands case to CIT(A) due to admission of additional evidence without opportunity to AO violated Rule 46A
During the assessment proceedings of assessee partnership firm engaged in the business of contract execution, in the absence of any response to several notices issued,, order u/s. 144 was passed wherein the addition of unsecured loan & also the difference in contract receipt offered for tax & contract receipt on which tax is deducted as per Form 26AS resulted into addition @ 8% .
CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal admitting additional evidence deleted the addition of the unsecured loan u/s. 68 holding the same are advances with respect to contract receipts received in advance.
In the appeal of the assessee, before the Tribunal the addition confirmed by CIT(A) was deleted. Thus, the issue in appeal of assessee was with respect to deletion of 8% profit on suppressed contract receipt of Rs.2,63,34,857, which was decided in favour of assessee.
In the appeal of the revenue, the AO is aggrieved with deletion of addition u/s. 68 by CIT(A) by admission of the additional evidence without giving proper opportunity to the AO & in clear violation of Rule 46A of the I.T. Rules.
