Case Details

Citation(s)
2007 SLG 3658 2007 SLD 3658 (2007) 291 ITR 77
Gauhati High Court

P.G. AGARWAL AND H.N. SARMA, JJ.

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395


Deprecated: preg_match(): Passing null to parameter #2 ($subject) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 411

Deprecated: htmlspecialchars(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 435

Law:

Section:

[2007] 291 ITR 77 (GAU.) HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI Commissioner of Income-tax v. Parimal Kanti Chanda P.G. AGARWAL AND H.N. SARMA, JJ. ITA NO. 38 OF 2004 FEBRUARY 20, 2007 Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Commissioner (Appeals) - Procedure of Ò–  Where on assessee's prayer for adducing additional evidence, assessing authority was given sufficient opportunity and revenue also took time to verify additional evidence but no objection was filed, Commissioner (Appeals) was justified in admitting additional evidence [Assessment year 1998-99] The assessee prayed to the Commissioner (Appeals) for adducing additional evidence in support of his plea raised in the appeal. The revenue was given a notice and although time was granted, no objection was filed by the revenue and on consideration of the additional evidence, the appeal was allowed. The question was whether the Commissioner (Appeals) was justified in entertaining additional evidence. Held that the assessing authority was given sufficient opportunity and the revenue also took time to verify the additional evidence but no objection was filed and, thereafter, the was delivered by the appellate authority and adducing of additional evidence was allowed to do substantial justice in the matter and not to thwart the evidence at the initial stage so as not to prejudice either party. Hence, the Commissioner (Appeals) was justified in admitting additional evidence. JUDGMENT P.G. Agarwal, J.-Heard Mr. U. Bhuyan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, and Dr. A.K. Saraf, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. The appeal was admitted for hearing on the following substantial questions of law- "1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified and correct in law in holding that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) did not violate the provisions of rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, and in upholding the decision of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in admitting additional evidence ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified and correct in law in confirming the deletion by the Commissioner of Income-tax…
πŸ”’
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492