Hitec Cyber City Spaces LLP Vs ACIT (ITAT Hyderabad)
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Hyderabad, allowed the assessee’s appeal for statistical purposes by admitting additional evidence and remanding the matter to the Assessing Officer (AO) for fresh adjudication after accepting the explanation for the delay in producing supporting documents.
The assessee, a Limited Liability Partnership (LLP), filed its return of income for Assessment Year 2022-23 declaring a total income of Rs.1,88,46,730. The case was selected for scrutiny on account of high liabilities or substantial increase in capital and large investment in immovable property. During the assessment proceedings, the AO issued a notice under Section 142(1) seeking details and documentary evidence relating to fresh capital introduced, investment in immovable property, bank statements, exempt income, and creditors. As the assessee failed to furnish the required information despite reminders, the AO completed the assessment under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B and made additions towards unexplained capital contribution under Section 68, unverifiable other payables, disallowance of interest expenditure, and unexplained investment in immovable property under Section 69.
Before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the assessee sought to produce additional evidence under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. However, the application was rejected on the technical ground that Form No. 35 indicated that no additional documentary evidence was being relied upon. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed without admitting the additional evidence.
