https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68341 The court set aside the Dy. CIT(A)'s order and remanded the case for a fresh decision, emphasizing compliance with Rule 46A of the IT Rules and procedural fairness. The judgment highlighted the importance of providing the Assessing Officer with an opportunity to examine additional evidence, particularly concerning agricultural income disclosed in a revised return post search operations. The decision underscored the need for verifiable agricultural income supported by documentary evidence and adherence to legal procedures in considering such evidence. Both appeals were treated as allowed for statistical purposes. en-us Mon, 24 Apr 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 29 Mar 2011 13:38:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68341 The court set aside the Dy. CIT(A)'s order and remanded the case for a fresh decision, emphasizing compliance with Rule 46A of the IT Rules and procedural fairness. The judgment highlighted the importance of providing the Assessing Officer with an opportunity to examine additional evidence, particularly concerning agricultural income disclosed in a revised return post search operations. The decision underscored the need for verifiable agricultural income supported by documentary evidence and adherence to legal procedures in considering such evidence. Both appeals were treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 24 Apr 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68341