Commitment proceedings gain extended timelines, structured defect refiling, and automatic resumption of inquiry after the adjusted completion period e...
Centralised assessment transfer becomes unwarranted once the searched person's assessment is complete, requiring restoration to the appropriate charge...
Co-operative deduction eligibility excludes refund and commercial-bank interest, while qualifying co-operative investments require entity-wise verific...
Enhanced tax rate on surrendered unexplained income applies prospectively, while cash-deposit telescoping requires verification of available surrender...
Page of 4800
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1 to 20 of 96000 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Rule 46A permits additional evidence before the first appellate authority only in the specified circumstances, and the permission must be supported by a written, reasoned order; the Assessing Officer must also be given a mandatory opportunity to examine and rebut that evidence in compliance with audi alteram partem. Here, no reasons were recorded for admitting the additional evidence and no material showed that the Assessing Officer was afforded any real opportunity to rebut it. The Tribunal therefore erred in sustaining the Commissioner (Appeals)' order. The Tribunal and Commissioner (Appeals) orders were set aside, and the matter was remanded for a fresh speaking order on admission of additional evidence and, if admitted, an opportunity to the Assessing Officer to rebut it.
Rule 46A permits additional evidence before the first appellate authority only in the specified circumstances, and the permission must be supported by a written, reasoned order; the Assessing Officer must also be given a mandatory opportunity to examine and rebut that evidence in compliance with audi alteram partem. Here, no reasons were recorded for admitting the additional evidence and no material showed that the Assessing Officer was afforded any real opportunity to rebut it. The Tribunal therefore erred in sustaining the Commissioner (Appeals)' order. The Tribunal and Commissioner (Appeals) orders were set aside, and the matter was remanded for a fresh speaking order on admission of additional evidence and, if admitted, an opportunity to the Assessing Officer to rebut it.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.