This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
Non-mention of Rule 46A not a ground to reject evidence; fresh adjudication directed
Case Law Details
- Case Name
- Munireddy Prakashreddy Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai)
- Appeal Number
- Only available for paid members
- Date of Judgement/Order
- Only available for paid members
- Related Assessment Year
- 2012-13
- Courts
- All ITAT, ITAT Chennai
Upgrade to Basic or Premium to download.
Already Upgraded? Log in.
Munireddy Prakashreddy Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai)
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Chennai bench has set aside an order by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] and remanded a case involving an unexplained cash deposit of ₹23.08 lakh for fresh adjudication. The ITAT ruled that the mere non-mention of Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, which governs the admission of additional evidence, by the assessee was not a valid ground for the CIT(A) to reject the evidence presented.
The appeal was filed by Munireddy Prakashreddy against the CIT(A)’s order for the assessment year 2012-13...
