https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757534 The ITAT Mumbai allowed the AO's appeal against CIT(A)'s deletion of addition for unexplained creditor. The CIT(A) had admitted additional evidence and deleted the addition without following proper procedures under Rule 46A of IT Rules, 1962. The tribunal found violations as CIT(A) failed to: record any application for additional evidence admission, seek AO's comments, pass specific order admitting evidence, or provide opportunity to AO for verification. The matter was restored to CIT(A) for fresh decision after complying with Rule 46A provisions. en-us Fri, 23 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 28 Aug 2024 09:07:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757534 The ITAT Mumbai allowed the AO's appeal against CIT(A)'s deletion of addition for unexplained creditor. The CIT(A) had admitted additional evidence and deleted the addition without following proper procedures under Rule 46A of IT Rules, 1962. The tribunal found violations as CIT(A) failed to: record any application for additional evidence admission, seek AO's comments, pass specific order admitting evidence, or provide opportunity to AO for verification. The matter was restored to CIT(A) for fresh decision after complying with Rule 46A provisions. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 23 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757534