https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248560 The ITAT allowed the Revenue's appeal, setting aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) due to the improper admission of additional evidence without following Rule 46A procedures. The ITAT emphasized the necessity of confronting such evidence to the Assessing Officer before consideration. The case was remanded to the ld. CIT(A) for re-adjudication, with instructions to obtain comments from the Assessing Officer on the additional evidence. Both parties were granted the opportunity to present their arguments afresh. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, underscoring the importance of adhering to procedural rules in appellate proceedings. en-us Thu, 29 May 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 16 Jun 2014 22:12:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248560 The ITAT allowed the Revenue's appeal, setting aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) due to the improper admission of additional evidence without following Rule 46A procedures. The ITAT emphasized the necessity of confronting such evidence to the Assessing Officer before consideration. The case was remanded to the ld. CIT(A) for re-adjudication, with instructions to obtain comments from the Assessing Officer on the additional evidence. Both parties were granted the opportunity to present their arguments afresh. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, underscoring the importance of adhering to procedural rules in appellate proceedings. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 29 May 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248560