Recently, in ACIT v. Modi Revlon Pvt Ltd, the Delhi ITAT held that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) can admit additional evidences produced by the assessee by if the Assessing Officer does not file remand report even after several reminders. The bench clarified that, in such cases, Rule 46A of the Income Rules would not be treated as violated.
In the instant case, the Revenue approached the ITAT contending that the CIT(A) has admitted additional evidence violating Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules.
Assessee, on the other hand maintained that on receipt of the application for additional evidence, the CIT(A) invited comments of the AO. However, the AO did not filed remand report even after several reminders from the CIT(A). It was therefore, submitted that rule 46A had not violated in the present case.
Accepting the contentions of the assessee, the bench observed that there is no infirmity in the order passed by the first appellate authority when despite giving an opportunity to the AO no response was received after one year.
The bench further noticed the decision in CIT v. Imperial Cable Pvt Ltd, wherein the Delhi High Court held that where more than adequate opportunities were given to the to respond to the application mode by the assessee for placing additional evidences before the appellate authority and when the AO has no interest in the matter, then the appellate authority has no other option but to follow the application and take additional evidences on record.
Read the full text of the Order below.
