https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448797 The Gujarat HC ruled against the revenue in a case involving bogus sundry creditors where the AO treated the net increase in creditors as an addition. The CIT(A) deleted the addition after admitting additional evidence. The revenue challenged this, arguing the CIT(A) violated Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. The HC held that the assessee, being illiterate and educated only up to fourth standard, was prevented by sufficient cause from producing evidence before the AO. The CIT(A) correctly admitted additional evidence under Rule 46A(1)(b), as appellate proceedings continue assessment proceedings. en-us Tue, 16 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 22 Oct 2024 17:02:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448797 The Gujarat HC ruled against the revenue in a case involving bogus sundry creditors where the AO treated the net increase in creditors as an addition. The CIT(A) deleted the addition after admitting additional evidence. The revenue challenged this, arguing the CIT(A) violated Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. The HC held that the assessee, being illiterate and educated only up to fourth standard, was prevented by sufficient cause from producing evidence before the AO. The CIT(A) correctly admitted additional evidence under Rule 46A(1)(b), as appellate proceedings continue assessment proceedings. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 16 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448797