https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65643 The Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of the CIT(A) regarding the assessment year 1993-94. The Tribunal found that the deletion of Rs.60,147 as undisclosed income by the CIT(A) was based on evidence that violated Rule 46A of the IT Rules, 1962. Despite the assessee's argument that the CIT(A) had the authority to consider additional evidence under section 250(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal held that the evidence admitted was against procedural rules and principles of natural justice. Consequently, the CIT(A) order was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh disposal. en-us Wed, 31 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 18 Feb 2011 11:12:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65643 The Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of the CIT(A) regarding the assessment year 1993-94. The Tribunal found that the deletion of Rs.60,147 as undisclosed income by the CIT(A) was based on evidence that violated Rule 46A of the IT Rules, 1962. Despite the assessee's argument that the CIT(A) had the authority to consider additional evidence under section 250(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal held that the evidence admitted was against procedural rules and principles of natural justice. Consequently, the CIT(A) order was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh disposal. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 31 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65643