https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445040 The ITAT Mumbai dismissed the Revenue's appeal regarding undisclosed income based on differences between financial statements and Form 26AS. The CIT(A) had deleted the addition after the assessee provided reconciliation sheets. Revenue contended that Rule 46A of IT Rules required providing opportunity to be heard when additional evidence was admitted. The ITAT held that since CIT(A) has coterminous powers and the issue involved only account reconciliation which was adequately explained, no remand report from AO was necessary. The appeal was decided against Revenue. en-us Wed, 28 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Oct 2023 08:49:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445040 The ITAT Mumbai dismissed the Revenue's appeal regarding undisclosed income based on differences between financial statements and Form 26AS. The CIT(A) had deleted the addition after the assessee provided reconciliation sheets. Revenue contended that Rule 46A of IT Rules required providing opportunity to be heard when additional evidence was admitted. The ITAT held that since CIT(A) has coterminous powers and the issue involved only account reconciliation which was adequately explained, no remand report from AO was necessary. The appeal was decided against Revenue. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 28 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445040