https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38414 The court ruled in favor of the assessee, finding that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner did not exceed his jurisdiction by receiving additional evidence during the appeal against the best judgment assessment. The court also held that the Tribunal was mistaken in concluding that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner affirmed the Income-tax Officer's decision under section 146. Additionally, the court determined that the Tribunal's finding that Rs. 4,00,000 was the concealed income of Dr. Munshi Ram was incorrect, as the money belonged to another individual. The court did not address the remaining issues and made no order as to costs. en-us Thu, 09 Dec 1976 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 06 Apr 2010 11:00:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38414 The court ruled in favor of the assessee, finding that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner did not exceed his jurisdiction by receiving additional evidence during the appeal against the best judgment assessment. The court also held that the Tribunal was mistaken in concluding that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner affirmed the Income-tax Officer's decision under section 146. Additionally, the court determined that the Tribunal's finding that Rs. 4,00,000 was the concealed income of Dr. Munshi Ram was incorrect, as the money belonged to another individual. The court did not address the remaining issues and made no order as to costs. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 09 Dec 1976 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38414