https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269247 In assessments under section 153A of the Income-tax Act, the Assessing Officer is not confined to incriminating search material alone and may consider other material as well, so the Commissioner (Appeals) was wrong to treat the absence of incriminating material as a bar to additions. The objection that additional evidence was wrongly admitted on the land-investment issue failed because no fresh evidence was actually admitted and the explanation was drawn from material already available, so Rule 46A was not breached. The share application money and unsecured loan issues were remanded for fresh examination because complete information had not been furnished and the additions had not been properly examined on merits after giving the assessee due opportunity. en-us Fri, 09 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Nov 2015 12:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269247 In assessments under section 153A of the Income-tax Act, the Assessing Officer is not confined to incriminating search material alone and may consider other material as well, so the Commissioner (Appeals) was wrong to treat the absence of incriminating material as a bar to additions. The objection that additional evidence was wrongly admitted on the land-investment issue failed because no fresh evidence was actually admitted and the explanation was drawn from material already available, so Rule 46A was not breached. The share application money and unsecured loan issues were remanded for fresh examination because complete information had not been furnished and the additions had not been properly examined on merits after giving the assessee due opportunity. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 09 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269247