IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCHES, SMC CHANDIGARH , BEFORE: SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1542/Chd/2018 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Shri Sanjeev Sood Vs. ITO C/o Sood Marketing Inc, Parwanoo, Bawa Complex, Sector-1, Distt. Solan (H.P.) Parwanno, Distt-Solan (H.P) PAN NO: AFCPS9525H Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Surinder Babbar, CA Revenue by : Shri Manjit Singh Date of Hearing : 14/08/2019 Date of Pronouncement : 21.08.2019 Order PER DIVA SINGH: present appeal has been filed by assessee assailing correctness of order dated 28/09/2018 of CIT(A)-, Shimla pertaining to 2013 14 Assessment year on following grounds: 1. On facts and circumstances of case, Ld. CIT(A), Shimla has grossly erred in concurrence with Ld. A.O. in upholding disallowance of Rs. 94,918/- under s. 40(a)(ia) of Income-tax Act. 1961 despite fact that requisite certificate in Form No. 26A under first proviso to sub-section (1) of section 201 for payment of tax by payee was duly filed before Ld. CIT(A). ITA-1542/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2013-14 Page 2 of 4 2. On facts and circumstances of case, Ld. CIT(A) should have considered requisite Form 26A filed during appellate proceedings keeping in view fact that same could not be obtained during assessment proceedings. 3. appellant craves leave to add, amend, delete any ground of appeal before disposal of appeal. 2. relevant facts of case have been set out in para 5.3 to para 5.3.1 by CIT(A.) For ready reference relevant discussion is extracted hereunder for sake of completeness : 5.3 Ground No. 3 : AO noticed that assessee has debited to P&L account amount of Rs. 94,918/- on account of interest paid to M/s HDB Finance Co., which was Non-Banking Finance Company. It was also noticed by A.O. that no TDS was deducted by assessee while making payment of interest to said NBFC as required by provisions of section 194A of Act. A.O. asked assessee to show cause as to why interest paid to NBFC may not be disallowed and brought to tax. In response, assessee filed reply and same was considered by A.O. and A.O. held that assessee has tried to contend that he was eligible for benefit of first proviso to section 201(1) of Act. To avail benefit of proviso to section 201(1), it was necessity on part of assessee to furnish certificate that M/s. HDB Finance Co. has furnished its return of income under section 139, has taken into account such sum for computing income in such return of income and has paid tax due on income declared by it in such return of income. During course of assessment proceedings, assessee was asked to furnish necessary certificate which he has failed to do so. Accordingly, disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of Act was made to extent of Rs.94,918/- and same was added to taxable income of assessee. 5.3.1 appellant has furnished certificate as additional evidence during appeal proceedings. perusal of order of A.O shows that more than 2 months were given by A.O to furnish evidence during assessment stage but same was not availed . Hence additional evidence cannot be admitted at this stage. Even on merits , requirement of above certificate is not mere formality . appellant has made out no case for admission of additional evidence or placed anything on record to suggest that efforts were made to produce desired certificate at assessment stage and failure to produce ITA-1542/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2013-14 Page 3 of 4 same was for reasons beyond its control. Accordingly, this ground of appeal of appellant is dismissed. (emphasis supplied) 3. Both parties have been heard. 4. fact that AO in course of hearing provided adequate opportunity is not in dispute. assessee as per above finding, admittedly failed to make out case as to why evidence be admitted. However, considering nature of evidence sought to be admitted, it is seen that it was necessary and relevant evidence for determining issue. Accordingly, in interests of substantial justice, it is deemed appropriate to set aside impugned order for verification. parties were required to address their arguments as to which Forum issue be remanded. ld. CIT-DR stated that it is fresh evidence which needs to be verified, hence it may be remanded to AO. ld. AR also re-iterated similar prayer. Accordingly, in light of prayer of parties before Bench issue is remanded back to AO to verify content of assessee s claim and pass speaking order in accordance with law after giving assessee reasonable opportunity of being heard. Said order was pronounced in Open Court at time of hearing itself. ITA-1542/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2013-14 Page 4 of 4 5. In result, appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open Court on 21st August,2019. Sd/- , (DIVA SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER AG/Poonam Copy of order forwarded to : 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. 2 , 2 , 5 DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. Guard File By order, Assistant Registrar Sanjeev Sood v. ITO, Parwanoo