https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35691 The High Court of Gujarat held that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (AAC) erred in admitting additional evidence without granting the Income Tax Officer (ITO) the opportunity to examine or cross-examine witnesses, emphasizing the ITO's right to natural justice. The Court ruled against the assessee, finding that the Tribunal should have ensured the ITO's participation in addressing the additional evidence. Additionally, the Court upheld the Tribunal's decision not to refer a question regarding the deletion of an addition made by the ITO under section 69A, as the AAC's decision was based on the appellant's statement rather than the additional evidence. The Court ruled in favor of the revenue, affirming the deletion of the addition. en-us Fri, 17 Jul 1981 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 16 Mar 2010 11:31:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35691 The High Court of Gujarat held that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (AAC) erred in admitting additional evidence without granting the Income Tax Officer (ITO) the opportunity to examine or cross-examine witnesses, emphasizing the ITO's right to natural justice. The Court ruled against the assessee, finding that the Tribunal should have ensured the ITO's participation in addressing the additional evidence. Additionally, the Court upheld the Tribunal's decision not to refer a question regarding the deletion of an addition made by the ITO under section 69A, as the AAC's decision was based on the appellant's statement rather than the additional evidence. The Court ruled in favor of the revenue, affirming the deletion of the addition. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 17 Jul 1981 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35691