Rule 46A compliance and pre-strike-off reassessment validity require fresh adjudication with opportunity to the Assessing Officer.

Fresh documentary evidence admitted in appellate proceedings cannot be used to alter an assessment without giving the Assessing Officer a reasonable opportunity to examine it under Rule 46A; the matter was remitted for de novo consideration. A company's subsequent striking off under Section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013 does not invalidate reassessment proceedings initiated before the struck-off date, because liabilities and the assessment process survive where proceedings commenced while the company was in istence. The Assessing Officer may therefore proceed to determine tax liability after affording due hearing, and both appeals were sent back for fresh adjudication without opinion on merits.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the admission by the first appellate authority of fresh documentary evidence (profit & loss account, balance-sheet, bank statements, Form 26AS) without affording an opportunity to the Assessing Officer violated Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules, 1962; (ii) Whether the company being struck off under Section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013 affects the competence of the Assessing Officer to proceed with reassessment initiated prior to struck-off date and the appropriate remedial order.

Issue (i): Whether the first appellate authority properly admitted fresh documentary evidence without providing opportunity to the Assessing Officer under Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules, 1962.

Analysis: The Tribunal examined the appellate record, the documents filed before the first appellate authority and the absence of any opportunity recorded given to the Assessing Officer to examine or comment on the newly filed documentary material. The Tribunal noted that admission of fresh documentary evidence in appeal proceedings requires adherence to Rule 46A and that the Assessing Officer must be given a reasonable opportunity to examine such material before any conclusive deletion or modification of assessment is directed.

Conclusion: The first appellate authority's admission of the fresh documentary evidence without providing an opportunity to the Assessing Officer was not appropriate; the matter is remanded for fresh assessment after allowing the Assessing Officer reasonable opportunity to examine the evidence.

Issue (ii): Whether the fact that the company was struck off under Section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013 invalidates or vitiates reassessment proceedings initiated prior to the struck-off date.

Analysis: The Tribunal observed that reassessment proceedings were initiated on 31.03.2021, prior to the company's struck-off date (Form STK-7 dated 11.10.2021). The Tribunal held that dissolution by striking off post-initiation does not automatically extinguish liabilities or proceedings that commenced while the company was in existence, and that provisions of Section 248(7) read with Section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013 operate for practical purposes where relevant.

Conclusion: The company's subsequent struck-off status does not invalidate the reassessment initiated before the struck-off date; liabilities and the assessment process survive and the Assessing Officer may proceed to determine tax liability after affording opportunity of hearing.

Final Conclusion: The consolidated effect of the decision is that both the revenue's and the assessee's appeals are directed to be remitted to the Assessing Officer for de novo assessment; the Tribunal has not expressed any opinion on the merits but requires the Assessing Officer to examine the documentary evidence after allowing proper and reasonable opportunity of being heard.

Ratio Decidendi: Fresh documentary evidence filed before the appellate authority cannot be admitted to the detriment of the assessing process without giving the Assessing Officer a reasonable opportunity to examine and reconsider the assessment; reassessment proceedings initiated while a company existed remain valid despite subsequent striking off.

---