https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449120 The Tribunal set aside the order of the Ld. CIT (A) and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, allowing the appellant to present additional evidence regarding the nature of the asset and ownership details. The Tribunal found that the Ld. CIT (A) erred in not admitting crucial evidence necessary for calculating Long Term Capital Gain, violating principles of natural justice. The appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes, providing the appellant an opportunity to prove their case with proper evidence before the Assessing Officer. en-us Wed, 27 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 06 Feb 2024 08:22:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449120 The Tribunal set aside the order of the Ld. CIT (A) and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, allowing the appellant to present additional evidence regarding the nature of the asset and ownership details. The Tribunal found that the Ld. CIT (A) erred in not admitting crucial evidence necessary for calculating Long Term Capital Gain, violating principles of natural justice. The appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes, providing the appellant an opportunity to prove their case with proper evidence before the Assessing Officer. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 27 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449120